CVE-2026-47410

Type: Insecure default cryptographic key. The JWT signing secret defaults to the hardcoded literal "dev-secret-change-me" when PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET is unset. A safety check exists but only fires when PLATFORM_ENV != "dev"; the default value of PLATFORM_ENV is "dev", so the check is silently bypassed in any deployment that does not explicitly opt out. The attacker reads the literal from this public source file, mints a JWT with arbitrary sub and email claims, and authenticates as any existing user (including workspace owners and admins).
File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py, lines 25-36 and 114-137.
Root cause: the production-mode guard checks os.environ.get("PLATFORM_ENV", "dev") != "dev", but the default is "dev", so a clean deployment that just imports the package and runs uvicorn praisonai_platform.api.app:app proceeds with the hardcoded secret. The package documentation does not warn loudly enough that BOTH variables must be set; the guard suppresses itself when either condition is missed. JWT verification at line 129 trusts whatever the token says (sub, email, name) once the HMAC-SHA256 signature validates against the publicly-known secret. Since the verifier accepts forged tokens for any user_id, the attacker becomes that user across every authenticated route.

Affected Code

File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py, lines 25-36 and 114-137.

_DEFAULT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me"
JWT_SECRET = os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET", _DEFAULT_SECRET)            # <-- BUG: silent fallback
JWT_ALGORITHM = "HS256"
JWT_TTL_SECONDS = int(os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_TTL", str(30 * 24 * 3600)))

if JWT_SECRET == _DEFAULT_SECRET and os.environ.get("PLATFORM_ENV", "dev") != "dev":
    raise RuntimeError(                                                          # <-- only fires if PLATFORM_ENV is non-default
        "PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET must be set to a strong random value in production. "
        "Set PLATFORM_ENV=dev to suppress this check during development."
    )

# ...

def _issue_token(self, user: User) -> str:
    payload = {
        "sub": user.id,
        "email": user.email,
        "name": user.name,
        "iat": now,
        "exp": now + timedelta(seconds=JWT_TTL_SECONDS),
    }
    return jwt.encode(payload, JWT_SECRET, algorithm=JWT_ALGORITHM)             # signs with the hardcoded secret

def _verify_token(self, token: str) -> Optional[AuthIdentity]:
    try:
        payload = jwt.decode(token, JWT_SECRET, algorithms=[JWT_ALGORITHM])     # verifies with the hardcoded secret
        return AuthIdentity(
            id=payload["sub"],                                                  # <-- attacker chooses sub
            type="user",
            email=payload.get("email"),
            name=payload.get("name"),
        )
    except jwt.InvalidTokenError:
        return None

Why it's wrong: the guard's predicate is wrong. The intent, "warn loudly if a production deployment ships without setting the secret", is correct, but the implementation requires the operator to set BOTH variables (PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET and PLATFORM_ENV != "dev") for the guard to fire. A common deployment misconfiguration is to set only one (or neither): pip install praisonai-platform, uvicorn praisonai_platform.api.app:app --host 0.0.0.0, done. The package starts with no warning, the JWT signing key is the literal string sitting in this source file, and any attacker who reads the GitHub repo can forge tokens. The standard pattern is to fail-closed at import time when the secret is the default, regardless of any environment variable. The code at line 32-36 inverts that: it fails-open by default and only fails-closed when the operator opts in.

Exploit Chain

1. Attacker reads auth_service.py:25 from the public GitHub repo (MervinPraison/PraisonAI) and notes _DEFAULT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me". State: attacker holds the JWT signing key.
2. Attacker identifies a target deployment of praisonai-platform (Shodan search for the FastAPI route /auth/me, the praisonai_platform user-agent, or any indexed installation). Attacker registers a free account at POST /auth/register to confirm the deployment is live and to obtain at least one valid JWT token whose structure they can copy. State: attacker holds a live account.
3. Attacker enumerates the platform's user IDs via any of the IDOR primitives filed as separate advisories (issue created_by, agent owner_id, comment author_id, member list via the workspace-member-IDOR), or simply queries /auth/me with their own token to learn the UUID format. State: attacker has a target user UUID T_id (e.g. a workspace owner of any tenant).
4. Attacker forges a JWT:

   import jwt, time
   payload = {"sub": "T_id", "email": "[email protected]", "name": "victim",
              "iat": int(time.time()), "exp": int(time.time()) + 3600}
   token = jwt.encode(payload, "dev-secret-change-me", algorithm="HS256")
   

   State: attacker holds a JWT that the deployment's _verify_token will accept as authentic.
5. Attacker sends GET /auth/me with Authorization: Bearer <forged_token>. _verify_token decodes the token using JWT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me", the HMAC matches, an AuthIdentity(id="T_id", ...) is returned. The route resolves the actual User row by User.id == "T_id" and returns the victim's record. State: attacker is authenticated as the victim.
6. Attacker pivots: POST /workspaces/{id}/members to add themselves as owner (chaining with the companion priv-esc advisory becomes redundant, the attacker is already the victim), PATCH /workspaces/{id} to flip settings, DELETE /workspaces/{id} to wipe data, or simply GET /workspaces/{id}/issues/... to exfiltrate everything the victim could read.
7. Final state: full account takeover for any user_id on any deployment that did not explicitly set both PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET and PLATFORM_ENV=production. No prior auth, no user interaction, no special network position required.

Security Impact

Severity: sec-critical. CVSS 9.8: network attack, low complexity, no privileges, no user interaction, scope unchanged (the JWT layer is the same component the attacker pivots through), high confidentiality, high integrity, high availability (chaining with delete_workspace from the companion advisory).
Attacker capability: mint a JWT for any user_id on the deployment with the public secret, becoming that user across every authenticated route. No prior authentication required, the attacker only needs the package to be deployed and reachable. This is a pre-auth full account takeover.
Preconditions: praisonai-platform is deployed without explicitly setting BOTH PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET AND PLATFORM_ENV=<non-dev>. The default deployment pattern (pip install, uvicorn ...) hits this. The attacker needs network reachability to the API.
Differential: source-inspection-verified end-to-end. The asymmetry is between the documented intent of the guard (warn in production) and its actual semantics (warn only when the operator sets PLATFORM_ENV to a non-"dev" value). With the suggested fix below, the guard fails-closed: any deployment that did not set PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET raises at import time, regardless of PLATFORM_ENV. The forged-token attack returns None from _verify_token because the signing key the attacker used ("dev-secret-change-me") no longer matches the deployment's secret.

Credentials are embedded in source code or a binary, making them accessible to anyone who can read the artifact. Typical impact: unauthorized access using the static credential.

CVE-2026-47410 has a CVSS score of 9.8 (Critical). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.1.4); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Kodem intelligence

Fail-closed at import time when the secret is the default, irrespective of PLATFORM_ENV. Permit explicit dev-mode opt-in with a separate variable that is NEVER the default.

--- a/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py
+++ b/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py
@@ -23,12 +23,16 @@
 _pwd_context = CryptContext(schemes=["bcrypt"], deprecated="auto")

-_DEFAULT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me"
-JWT_SECRET = os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET", _DEFAULT_SECRET)
+JWT_SECRET = os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET")
 JWT_ALGORITHM = "HS256"
 JWT_TTL_SECONDS = int(os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_TTL", str(30 * 24 * 3600)))

-if JWT_SECRET == _DEFAULT_SECRET and os.environ.get("PLATFORM_ENV", "dev") != "dev":
-    raise RuntimeError(
-        "PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET must be set to a strong random value in production. "
-        "Set PLATFORM_ENV=dev to suppress this check during development."
-    )
+if not JWT_SECRET:
+    if os.environ.get("PRAISONAI_PLATFORM_ALLOW_INSECURE_JWT") != "1":
+        raise RuntimeError(
+            "PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET must be set to a strong random value (min 32 bytes). "
+            "For local development, set PRAISONAI_PLATFORM_ALLOW_INSECURE_JWT=1 to "
+            "auto-generate an ephemeral random secret per process."
+        )
+    import secrets
+    JWT_SECRET = secrets.token_urlsafe(32)
+    # ephemeral; tokens issued before restart will not validate after restart
+    import warnings
+    warnings.warn("Using ephemeral JWT secret; set PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET in production")

The guard now fails-closed: an unset PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET raises at import unless the operator explicitly opts into dev mode with a separate variable. The dev-mode path generates a per-process random secret instead of using a hardcoded one, so even leaked dev-mode tokens cannot be used against another deployment. Add a startup banner that prints the JWT secret's hash prefix (not the secret itself) so operators can confirm at runtime which key is in use.

1. What is CVE-2026-47410? CVE-2026-47410 is a critical-severity use of hard-coded credentials vulnerability in praisonai-platform (pip), affecting versions <= 0.1.2. It is fixed in 0.1.4. Credentials are embedded in source code or a binary, making them accessible to anyone who can read the artifact.
2. How severe is CVE-2026-47410? CVE-2026-47410 has a CVSS score of 9.8 (Critical). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
3. Which versions of praisonai-platform are affected by CVE-2026-47410? praisonai-platform (pip) versions <= 0.1.2 is affected.
4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-47410? Yes. CVE-2026-47410 is fixed in 0.1.4. Upgrade to this version or later.
5. Is CVE-2026-47410 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-47410 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-47410 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
7. How do I fix CVE-2026-47410? Upgrade praisonai-platform to 0.1.4 or later.