Summary
PHP JWT Framework: JWSVerifier uses algorithm from unprotected header, enabling algorithm confusion attacks
JWSVerifier::getAlgorithm() in src/Library/Signature/JWSVerifier.php (line 144) merges protected and unprotected headers using PHP's spread operator:
$completeHeader = [...$signature->getProtectedHeader(), ...$signature->getHeader()];
In PHP, when spreading arrays with duplicate string keys, the last array's values take precedence. Since the unprotected header (getHeader()) is spread second, an attacker can override the integrity-protected alg parameter by placing a different value in the unprotected header.
This creates a Time-of-Check/Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) vulnerability:
HeaderCheckerManagervalidatesalgfrom the protected headerJWSVerifierusesalgfrom the unprotected header for actual verification
The same issue exists in JWEDecrypter.php (lines 120-124) where array_merge() exhibits the same last-wins behavior for alg and enc.
Affected Code
JWSVerifier.php line 144, Spread operator merge order allows unprotected header to override alg:
$completeHeader = [...$signature->getProtectedHeader(), ...$signature->getHeader()];
JWEDecrypter.php lines 120-124, array_merge() with same last-wins behavior:
$completeHeader = array_merge(
$jwe->getSharedProtectedHeader(),
$jwe->getSharedHeader(),
$recipient->getHeader()
);
Attack Vectors
Vector A, Mixed key sets (HIGH probability)
If the application uses a JWKSet containing keys of different types (common in multi-tenant or federation scenarios), the JWSVerifier iterates all keys (line 86). An attacker can force a different algorithm that matches a different key in the set.
Vector B, alg ONLY in unprotected header (HIGH probability)
If alg is placed EXCLUSIVELY in the unprotected header (not in the protected header at all), HeaderCheckerManager::checkDuplicatedHeaderParameters() does NOT trigger. The JSON Flattened/General serializers allow tokens with no protected header or a protected header without alg. RFC 7515 Section 4.1.1 states alg MUST be integrity-protected, but the library does not enforce this.
Vector C, Direct JWSVerifier usage (HIGH probability)
JWSLoader takes ?HeaderCheckerManager (nullable). If developers use JWSVerifier directly or create JWSLoader without a HeaderCheckerManager, the duplicate header check never runs.
Contrast with JWSBuilder (safe)
JWSBuilder::findSignatureAlgorithm() (line 196) uses [...$header, ...$protectedHeader] where protected wins. It also has checkDuplicatedHeaderParameters() (line 218). The JWSVerifier has neither safeguard.
Proof of Concept
<?php
// Demonstrate algorithm override via unprotected header
$protected = ["alg" => "RS256", "typ" => "JWT"];
$unprotected = ["alg" => "HS256"];
$merged = [...$protected, ...$unprotected];
// $merged["alg"] === "HS256", unprotected wins!
// JSON Flattened JWS with algorithm override:
$maliciousJws = json_encode([
'payload' => base64url_encode($payload),
'protected' => base64url_encode('{"alg":"RS256"}'),
'header' => ['alg' => 'HS256'], // OVERRIDE
'signature' => base64url_encode($sig),
]);
// HeaderCheckerManager validates RS256 from protected header -> PASS
// JWSVerifier uses HS256 from unprotected header -> attacker's algorithm choice
A full working PoC demonstrating HS512-to-HS256 downgrade with mixed keysets is available upon request.
Résolution
Un correctif a été préparé sur une branche dédiée basée sur 3.4.x, avec des tests anti-régression dédiés (fork privé temporaire de cette advisory, PR #1).
JWS algorithm confusion, JWSVerifier lit le paramètre alg exclusivement dans le header protégé en intégrité (RFC 7515 §4.1.1) ; un alg placé dans le header non protégé ne peut plus surcharger l'algorithme signé.
Validation : php -l OK, PHPUnit vert, aucune nouvelle erreur PHPStan introduite (différentiel nul vs 3.4.x), aucun commentaire ajouté dans le code source. Après merge, cascade prévue 3.4.x → 4.0.x → 4.1.x.
Impact
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
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. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
In JWSVerifier::getAlgorithm(), read alg exclusively from the protected header:
private function getAlgorithm(Signature $signature): Algorithm
{
$protectedHeader = $signature->getProtectedHeader();
if (! isset($protectedHeader['alg'])) {
throw new InvalidArgumentException('The "alg" parameter must be in the protected header.');
}
return $this->signatureAlgorithmManager->get($protectedHeader['alg']);
}
For JWEDecrypter, reverse the merge order so protected header wins, or extract alg/enc exclusively from the protected header.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8? GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8 is a high-severity security vulnerability in web-token/jwt-library (composer), affecting versions < 3.4.10. It is fixed in 3.4.10, 4.0.7, 4.1.7.
- Which packages are affected by GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8?
web-token/jwt-library(composer) (versions < 3.4.10)web-token/jwt-bundle(composer) (versions < 3.4.10)web-token/jwt-experimental(composer) (versions < 3.4.10)web-token/jwt-framework(composer) (versions < 3.4.10)
- Is there a fix for GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8? Yes. GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8 is fixed in 3.4.10, 4.0.7, 4.1.7. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8 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
- What actually determines whether GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8 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.
- How do I fix GHSA-JC38-X7X8-2XC8?
- Upgrade
web-token/jwt-libraryto 3.4.10 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-libraryto 4.0.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-libraryto 4.1.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-bundleto 3.4.10 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-bundleto 4.0.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-bundleto 4.1.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-experimentalto 3.4.10 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-experimentalto 4.0.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-experimentalto 4.1.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-frameworkto 3.4.10 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-frameworkto 4.0.7 or later - Upgrade
web-token/jwt-frameworkto 4.1.7 or later
- Upgrade