joserfc: b64=false RFC7797 JWS payloads bypass JWSRegistry payload-size limits during deserialization
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.
- Products
- Not specified
- Affected versions
- Not specified
- Fixed versions
- Not specified
- CVEs
- CVE-2026-48990
- Confirmed fixed CVEs
- Not specified
- Updated in this feed
- 3 Nov 2026, 00:01 UTC · Revision 1
Source evidence
joserfc: b64=false RFC7797 JWS payloads bypass JWSRegistry payload-size limits during deserialization
core-osv · Original sourcePublished 17 Jun 2026, 21:08 UTC
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.
osv:CVE-2026-48990
Complete source record
{
"id": "dd4b901e03405e1dcadf120c4f9946b060e516450e9dfa7076993b9a3645917d",
"url": "https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2026-48990",
"method": "structured",
"payload": {
"kind": "advisory",
"title": "joserfc: b64=false RFC7797 JWS payloads bypass JWSRegistry payload-size limits during deserialization",
"summary": "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.",
"evidence": "osv:CVE-2026-48990",
"products": [],
"severity": "medium",
"structured": {
"id": "CVE-2026-48990",
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-48990",
"GHSA-wphv-vfrh-23q5",
"PYSEC-2026-2530"
],
"metrics": [
{
"type": "CVSS_V3",
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L"
}
],
"affected": [
{
"ranges": [
{
"repo": "https://github.com/authlib/joserfc",
"type": "GIT",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1e5b94da589c695f54abd9f1a0ad822dcffe0305"
}
],
"database_specific": {
"extracted_events": [
{
"range": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.6.7"
}
],
"source": "AFFECTED_FIELD",
"strategy": "StringRangeExpression"
},
{
"range": [
{
"fixed": "1e5b94da589c695f54abd9f1a0ad822dcffe0305"
}
],
"source": "REFERENCES_TAG",
"original_tag": "1.6.7"
}
]
}
}
],
"versions": [
"1.6.5",
"1.6.4",
"1.6.3",
"1.6.2",
"1.6.1",
"1.6.0",
"1.5.0",
"1.4.3",
"1.4.1",
"1.4.0",
"1.3.3",
"1.3.2",
"1.3.1",
"1.3.0",
"1.2.2",
"1.2.1",
"1.2.0",
"1.1.0",
"1.0.4",
"1.0.3",
"1.0.2",
"1.0.1",
"1.0.0",
"0.12.0",
"0.11.1",
"0.11.0",
"0.10.0",
"0.9.0",
"0.8.0",
"0.7.0",
"0.6.0",
"0.5.0",
"0.4.0",
"0.3.0",
"0.2.0"
],
"database_specific": {
"source": "https://storage.googleapis.com/cve-osv-conversion/osv-output/CVE-2026-48990.json"
}
}
],
"modified": "2026-10-28T02:30:24.567452912Z",
"provider": "osv",
"references": [
"https://github.com/authlib/joserfc/releases/tag/1.6.7",
"https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/48xxx/CVE-2026-48990.json",
"https://github.com/authlib/joserfc/security/advisories/GHSA-wphv-vfrh-23q5",
"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-48990"
],
"provider_metadata": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-400",
"CWE-770"
],
"cna_assigner": "GitHub_M",
"osv_generated_from": "https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/48xxx/CVE-2026-48990.json"
}
},
"related_cves": [
{
"value": "CVE-2026-48990",
"evidence": "/id"
}
],
"security_relevant": true,
"severity_evidence": "/severity/0/score"
},
"source_id": "core-osv",
"document_id": 491042,
"published_at": "2026-06-17T21:08:10.534+00:00"
}