AuthlibApplication

CVE-2026-28802

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-03-06
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 1.6.7 or later.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Public exploit Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click Patch available

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
Authlib is a Python library which builds OAuth and OpenID Connect servers. From version 1.6.5 to before version 1.6.7, previous tests involving passing a malicious JWT containing alg: none and an empty signature was passing the signature verification step without any changes to the application code when a failure was expected.. This issue has been patched in version 1.6.7.

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 · high confidence

The Authlib Python library versions 1.6.5 through 1.6.6 contain a JWT signature verification bypass vulnerability. Attackers can craft malicious JWTs with 'alg: none' in the header and an empty signature, which the library incorrectly accepts as valid instead of rejecting the malformed token.

MitigationUpdate Authlib to version 1.6.7 or later to patch the vulnerability. Review existing JWT authentication flows to ensure no tokens with alg: none are currently accepted.

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

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
AuthlibApplication
Affected:>= 1.6.5, < 1.6.7

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 Authlib installation
    Run `pip show authlib` or check your project's requirements.txt/dependencies list for the authlib package
    Affected if authlib is present in your environment
  2. Determine installed Authlib version
    Run `pip show authlib` and look for the Version field, or run `pip list | grep authlib`
    Affected if the version is 1.6.5, 1.6.6, or falls within the range >=1.6.5 and <1.6.7
  3. Locate JWT verification code
    Search your codebase for usages of `Authlib` JWT handling, such as `JwtBearer` from `authlib.integrations` or direct `jwt` module usage with Authlib's registry
    Affected if your code performs JWT token verification using Authlib's JWT capabilities
  4. Test if alg:none tokens bypass validation
    Create a test JWT with header `{"alg": "none", "typ": "JWT"}`, an empty payload claim set, and an empty signature string. Attempt to verify it using your actual verification code or Authlib's jwt.decode() with the same key/config you use in production
    Affected if the token is accepted as valid when it should be rejected, indicating the bypass exists

You are affected if Authlib version 1.6.5 through 1.6.6 is installed and your application performs JWT verification using this library, as it will accept tokens with alg:none and empty signatures.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 1.6.7 or later
Fixed in 1.6.7
Vendor patch github.com →
Interim mitigation

Update Authlib to version 1.6.7 or later to patch the vulnerability. Review existing JWT authentication flows to ensure no tokens with alg: none are currently accepted.

Recommended fix High confidence

Authlib version 1.6.7

  1. Verify current Authlib version: pip show authlib
  2. Upgrade Authlib to version 1.6.7 or later: pip install authlib==1.6.7
  3. If using a package manager like poetry or pipenv, update accordingly: poetry add authlib==1.6.7 or pipenv install authlib==1.6.7
  4. Verify the upgrade was successful: pip show authlib
  5. Run existing tests to confirm JWT signature verification now correctly rejects alg:none tokens

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Authlib Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation1.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
5.0 hours of engineering $860
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,376.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-28802 — 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-2026-28802 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