Lti Jupyterhub AuthenticatorApplication · Jupyter

CVE-2026-34052

MEDIUM · 5.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-04-03
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 1.6.3 or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
LTI JupyterHub Authenticator is a JupyterHub authenticator for LTI. Prior to version 1.6.3, the LTI 1.1 validator stores OAuth nonces in a class-level dictionary that grows without bounds. Nonces are added before signature validation, so an attacker with knowledge of a valid consumer key can send repeated requests with unique nonces to gradually exhaust server memory, causing a denial of service. This issue has been patched in version 1.6.3.

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 LTI JupyterHub Authenticator's LTI 1.1 validator stores OAuth nonces in an unbounded class-level dictionary. An attacker with a valid consumer key can send repeated requests with unique nonces, causing the dictionary to grow indefinitely and exhaust server memory, resulting in denial of service.

MitigationUpgrade to version 1.6.3 or later. Additionally, consider rate limiting and monitoring memory usage on servers running the authenticator to detect potential exploitation.

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
Lti Jupyterhub AuthenticatorApplication
Affected:< 1.6.3

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
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 the installed version of Jupyter LTI JupyterHub Authenticator
    Run the package manager command to display the installed version (for example: pip show lti-jupyterhub-authenticator or conda list lti-jupyterhub-authenticator)
    Affected if The version listed is below 1.6.3
  2. Determine if LTI 1.1 authentication is in use
    Review the JupyterHub configuration for LTI authenticator settings, specifically looking for LTI 1.1 consumer keys and the authenticator class being used
    Affected if LTI 1.1 authentication is configured and active in the JupyterHub deployment
  3. Inspect the nonce storage mechanism
    Examine the source code or runtime behavior of the LTI 1.1 validator to confirm whether nonces are stored in a class-level dictionary that persists across requests
    Affected if The nonce storage uses a growing in-memory dictionary without expiration or size limits

You are affected if running a version of Jupyter LTI JupyterHub Authenticator below 1.6.3 with LTI 1.1 authentication enabled, where the nonce storage mechanism allows unbounded memory growth.

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 1.6.3 or later
Fixed in 1.6.3
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to version 1.6.3 or later. Additionally, consider rate limiting and monitoring memory usage on servers running the authenticator to detect potential exploitation.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.6.3

  1. Check the currently installed version of lti-jupyterhub-authenticator using pip show or pip list
  2. Upgrade the package to version 1.6.3 or later using: pip install --upgrade lti-jupyterhub-authenticator>=1.6.3
  3. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version: pip show lti-jupyterhub-authenticator
  4. Restart the JupyterHub service to ensure the new version is loaded

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

Fix this in Lti Jupyterhub Authenticator Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,920
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,072.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-34052 — 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-2026-34052 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