CVE-2026-25554
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 · uneditedOpenSIPS versions 3.1 before 3.6.4 containing the auth_jwt module (prior to commit 3822d33) contain a SQL injection vulnerability in the jwt_db_authorize() function in modules/auth_jwt/authorize.c when db_mode is enabled and a SQL database backend is used. The function extracts the tag claim from a JWT without prior signature verification and incorporates the unescaped value directly into a SQL query. An attacker can supply a crafted JWT with a malicious tag claim to manipulate the query result and bypass JWT authentication, allowing impersonation of arbitrary identities.
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 analysisUser input is woven into a database query, letting an attacker rewrite the query's logic. From there they can read, alter, or destroy data — frequently the entire database. The reliable fix is parameterised queries (prepared statements), so input is always treated as data and never as SQL.
General guidance for the sql injection class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
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.
dbcve · scopedOpenSIPS 3.6.4 or later
- 1. Identify all OpenSIPS installations running versions 3.1.x through 3.3.x that use the auth_jwt module with db_mode enabled
- 2. Review the vulnerability details: the jwt_db_authorize() function in modules/auth_jwt/authorize.c extracts the 'tag' claim from JWT without signature verification and uses it directly in SQL queries
- 3. Obtain OpenSIPS version 3.6.4 or later from the official OpenSIPS repository (https://opensips.org/)
- 4. Before upgrading, backup the current OpenSIPS configuration and database
- 5. Upgrade OpenSIPS to version 3.6.4 or later which contains the patched auth_jwt module (commit 3822d33)
- 6. Alternatively, if staying on the current major version is required, apply the specific patch from commit 3822d33c1c6b25832fdd88da1d23eed74be55b05 to modules/auth_jwt/authorize.c
- 7. After upgrade/patch, restart OpenSIPS services
- 8. Verify JWT authentication is functioning correctly with the auth_jwt module
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-25554 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-25554 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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