Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
📦
📦 npm
Not in CISA KEV
HIGH severity

CVE-2026-35042 — fast-jwt

HIGH

CVE-2026-35042 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) CWE-345 vulnerability in fast-jwt. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed below.

fast-jwt accepts unknown `crit` header extensions (RFC 7515 §4.1.11 MUST violation)

Also known asGHSA-hm7r-c7qw-ghp6
Published
Apr 6, 2026
Updated
Aug 12, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
None yet
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 23, 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.
  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-35042.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs5th percentile — riskier than 5% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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-2026-35042 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 378,567 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

1 pkg affected

How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.

88other npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream
fast-jwtnpm
885Kdownloads / week

Description

Summary

fast-jwt does not validate the crit (Critical) Header Parameter defined in RFC 7515 §4.1.11. When a JWS token contains a crit array listing extensions that fast-jwt does not understand, the library accepts the token instead of rejecting it. This violates the MUST requirement in the RFC.


RFC Requirement

RFC 7515 §4.1.11:

If any of the listed extension Header Parameters are not understood and supported by the recipient, then the JWS is invalid.


Proof of Concept

const { createSigner, createVerifier } = require("fast-jwt"); // v3.3.3

const signer = createSigner({ key: "secret", algorithm: "HS256" });
const token = signer({
  sub: "attacker",
  role: "admin",
  header: { crit: ["x-custom-policy"], "x-custom-policy": "require-mfa" },
});

// Should REJECT — x-custom-policy is not understood
const verifier = createVerifier({ key: "secret", algorithms: ["HS256"] });
try {
  const result = verifier(token);
  console.log("ACCEPTED:", result);
  // Output: ACCEPTED: { sub: 'attacker', role: 'admin' }
} catch (e) {
  console.log("REJECTED:", e.message);
}

Expected: Error — unsupported critical extension Actual: Token accepted.

Comparison

// jose (panva) v4+ — correctly rejects
const jose = require("jose");
await jose.jwtVerify(token, new TextEncoder().encode("secret"));
// throws: Extension Header Parameter "x-custom-policy" is not recognized

Impact

  • Split-brain verification in mixed-library environments
  • Security policy bypass when crit carries enforcement semantics
  • Token binding bypass (RFC 7800 cnf confirmation)
  • See CVE-2025-59420 for full impact analysis

Suggested Fix

In src/verifier.js, add crit validation after header decoding:

const SUPPORTED_CRIT = new Set(["b64"]);

function validateCrit(header) {
  if (!header.crit) return;
  if (!Array.isArray(header.crit) || header.crit.length === 0)
    throw new Error("crit must be a non-empty array");
  for (const ext of header.crit) {
    if (!SUPPORTED_CRIT.has(ext))
      throw new Error(`Unsupported critical extension: ${ext}`);
    if (!(ext in header))
      throw new Error(`Critical extension ${ext} not present in header`);
  }
}

Affected Packages

1 total
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
📦npmfast-jwtall versionsNo fix

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

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

  2. Remediation status

    No patched version of fast-jwt has shipped for CVE-2026-35042 yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.

  3. Mitigate without a patch

    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.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-35042 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2026-35042. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary `fast-jwt` does not validate the `crit` (Critical) Header Parameter defined in RFC 7515 §4.1.11. When a JWS token contains a `crit` array listing extensions that `fast-jwt` does not understand, the library accepts the token instead of rejecting it. This violates the **MUST** requirement in the RFC. --- ## RFC Requirement RFC 7515 §4.1.11: > If any of the listed extension Header Parameters are **not understood > and supported** by the recipient, then the **JWS is invalid**. --- ## Proof of Concept ```javascript const { createSigner, createVerifier } = require("fast-jwt"); //
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-35042 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2026-35042 across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2026-35042: fast-jwt (High 7.5) | O3 Security