CVE Tools
Track your stack

CVE-2026-48990

joserfc: b64=false RFC7797 JWS payloads bypass JWSRegistry payload-size limits during deserialization

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 5th percentile. No fix published yet.

CVSS 3.15.3MediumEPSS percentile5th0.2% chance in 30 daysCISA KEVNot listedNo confirmed exploitation
No public exploit knownFixNone yetNo fix or workaround published

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

NVD CVE.org

What to do

No fixed build or workaround is published yet. Limit exposure and watch for a patch.

  • Authlib JoserfcAffected: < 1.6.7Upgrade to: not statedStated by: CVE record

Versions as the sources state them. Full version matrix after sign-in

Check it yourselfA free OpenVAS check exists for this CVE. Run it against your hosts.Is your organisation exposed?Request an assessment to establish which checks fit your systems.

What it is

From the CVE record

joserfc is a Python library that provides an implementation of several JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) standards. In versions 1.3.4 through 1.6.5, joserfc accepts oversized RFC7797 b64=false JWS payloads without applying JWSRegistry.max_payload_length, which can lead to resource exhaustion. The normal JWS compact and flattened JSON paths reject payloads above the configured payload-size limit with ExceededSizeError. The RFC7797 unencoded payload paths do not make the same check. A valid b64=false compact or flattened JSON JWS can therefore deserialize successfully with a payload larger than JWSRegistry.max_payload_length. Applications that accept lower-trust JWS values and rely on joserfc to reject oversized token content during verification have a moderate availability risk. This issue has been fixed in version 1.6.7.

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS5th
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

0.2% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 5th percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

6 events over 131 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Record updated
  2. OpenVAS check added
  3. Record updated
  4. Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS 3.1 vector

Open in the CVSS calculator

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

Scored 5.3 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
  • Attack Complexity LowNo special conditions — the attack can be reliably reproduced
  • Privileges Required NoneNo authentication required — anyone can exploit this
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality NoneNo confidentiality impact
  • Integrity NoneNo integrity impact
  • Availability LowReduced performance or intermittent disruption of service

Weaknesses

ATT&CK techniques

Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.

Sources

References in the record

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Joserfc, not every advisory.