Improper Signature VerificationWeakness · CWE-347

CVE-2023-53951

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-12-19
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Public exploit Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
Ever Gauzy v0.281.9 contains a JWT authentication vulnerability that allows attackers to exploit weak HMAC secret key implementation. Attackers can leverage the exposed JWT token to authenticate and gain unauthorized access with administrative permissions.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · moderate confidence

JWT authentication vulnerability in Ever Gauzy v0.281.9 stemming from weak HMAC secret key implementation. Attackers can forge JWT tokens using the exposed weak secret to bypass authentication and gain unauthorized administrative access.

MitigationImmediately rotate the weak JWT HMAC secret to a cryptographically strong, randomly generated key; audit and update token generation/validation code to use secure key management; consider invalidating all existing sessions tokens.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

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

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Ever Gauzy installation
    Search for Ever Gauzy directories or running processes (e.g., look for 'gauzy', 'gauzy-api', or related process names using 'ps aux | grep -i gauzy' or file system scans for gauzy-related folders)
    Affected if Ever Gauzy software is found running or installed on the system
  2. Determine installed Ever Gauzy version
    Check the package.json file, docker-compose.yml, or version file within the Gauzy installation directory for the version number; compare it against the affected version v0.281.9 and nearby releases
    Affected if Installed version matches or falls within the v0.281.9 release line (e.g., v0.281.x, v0.282.x)
  3. Locate JWT configuration
    Search for configuration files containing JWT settings: look for files named 'jwt.config.js', 'auth.config.js', 'config.ts', 'config.json', or similar in the Gauzy backend/api directory; also check for JWT-related entries in any configuration file
    Affected if JWT configuration files exist and the application uses JWT for authentication
  4. Inspect JWT secret key
    Open the JWT configuration files or environment configuration and examine the value assigned to JWT_SECRET, JWT_SECRET_KEY, or similar secret key variables; verify if the secret appears hardcoded, weak, or matches known default/placeholder values
    Affected if The JWT secret is hardcoded, set to a weak value, uses a default/placeholder string, or is absent (relying on a default)
  5. Check environment variable configuration
    Examine .env files, container environment settings, or system environment variables for JWT-related secrets (e.g., JWT_SECRET, GAUZY_JWT_SECRET, SECRET_KEY); note whether the secret is loaded from a secure secrets manager or environment variable
    Affected if JWT secrets are stored insecurely (e.g., in version control, unencrypted config files) or use a weak/guessable key

A user is affected if Ever Gauzy v0.281.9 (or nearby versions) is running with JWT authentication enabled and the HMAC secret key is hardcoded, weak, or uses a default value.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Immediately rotate the weak JWT HMAC secret to a cryptographically strong, randomly generated key; audit and update token generation/validation code to use secure key management; consider invalidating all existing sessions tokens.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,840
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-53951 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-53951 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data