GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg — getgrav/grav
LOWGHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg is a low-severity (CVSS 3.7) CWE-208 vulnerability in getgrav/grav. A fix is available for getgrav/grav — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Grav: Non constant time nonce comparison in Utils::verifyNonce() used for CSRF protection
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 GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg.
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
GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg 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 374,847 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
getgrav/gravReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Packagist packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
Grav\Common\Utils::verifyNonce(), the core function Grav and its plugins use to validate CSRF nonces, compares the submitted nonce to the expected value with PHP's === operator instead of hash_equals(). === on strings short circuits at the first differing byte, so the comparison time leaks how many leading bytes of a guess are correct. This is CWE-208, Observable Timing Discrepancy.
The codebase already knows to avoid this pattern. hash_equals() is used for the equivalent purpose in four other places I found: system/src/Grav/Common/Session.php, system/src/Grav/Framework/Cache/Adapter/FileCache.php, system/src/Grav/Common/Scheduler/Scheduler.php (the webhook token check), and system/src/Grav/Common/Scheduler/JobQueue.php. Utils::verifyNonce() is the one place I found that still uses a plain equality check for a secret comparison.
Affected product and version
Product: Grav CMS, getgrav/grav Confirmed present in: 2.0.15, commit c2b46866857a93a0aa7048e7ed707ed3ed45dbc3
Affected code
system/src/Grav/Common/Utils.php, lines 1512 to 1521:
public static function verifyNonce($nonce, $action)
{
//Safety check for multiple nonces
if (is_array($nonce)) {
$nonce = array_shift($nonce);
}
//Nonce generated 0-12 hours ago
if ($nonce === self::getNonce($action)) {
return true;
}
//Nonce generated 12-24 hours ago
return $nonce === self::getNonce($action, true);
}
The nonce itself is md5($tick . '|' . $action . '|' . $username . '|' . session_id() . '|' . Security::getNonceKey()), computed in the private generateNonceString() a few lines above. Security::getNonceKey() is an installation level secret. So the value being compared with === is a value derived from a secret, which is exactly the case hash_equals() exists for.
Proof of concept, verified, real output
I could not exploit this end to end over a real network from this sandbox, since that requires a live deployment and a timing measurement setup outside a single machine. What I did verify directly, by running real code, is that the underlying primitive this function relies on, PHP's === string comparison, is not constant time in the PHP build actually used here, and that a measurable timing signal is still present at the exact length Grav's nonces have, 32 hex characters, an md5 digest.
Step 1, confirm PHP build:
$ php -v
PHP 8.3.6 (cli) (built: Jul 16 2026 18:30:41) (NTS)
Step 2, benchmark script, measures the median time of $a === $b over many trials, once with a long string to establish a clean signal, once at the real 32 byte nonce length:
<?php
// timing_poc2.php
function timeCompare(string $a, string $b, int $iterations): float {
$r = null;
$start = hrtime(true);
for ($i = 0; $i < $iterations; $i++) {
$r = ($a === $b);
}
$end = hrtime(true);
return ($end - $start) / $iterations;
}
function median(array $arr): float {
sort($arr);
$n = count($arr);
$mid = intdiv($n, 2);
return $n % 2 ? $arr[$mid] : ($arr[$mid - 1] + $arr[$mid]) / 2;
}
function runExperiment(int $len, int $iterations, int $trials): array {
$secret = bin2hex(random_bytes((int)ceil($len / 2)));
$secret = substr($secret, 0, $len);
$wrongEarly = $secret;
$wrongEarly[0] = ($secret[0] === 'a') ? 'b' : 'a';
$wrongLate = $secret;
$last = $len - 1;
$wrongLate[$last] = ($secret[$last] === 'a') ? 'b' : 'a';
$earlyTimes = [];
$lateTimes = [];
timeCompare($wrongEarly, $secret, 20000);
timeCompare($wrongLate, $secret, 20000);
for ($t = 0; $t < $trials; $t++) {
$earlyTimes[] = timeCompare($wrongEarly, $secret, $iterations);
$lateTimes[] = timeCompare($wrongLate, $secret, $iterations);
}
return [median($earlyTimes), median($lateTimes)];
}
echo "=== Length 4096 bytes, establishes the primitive is not constant time ===\n";
[$e, $l] = runExperiment(4096, 20000, 15);
printf("Median mismatch at position 0 : %.2f ns/op\n", $e);
printf("Median mismatch at last position : %.2f ns/op\n", $l);
printf("Ratio (late/early) : %.2fx\n\n", $l / $e);
echo "=== Length 32 bytes, the actual Grav nonce length, md5 hex output ===\n";
[$e2, $l2] = runExperiment(32, 200000, 21);
printf("Median mismatch at position 0 : %.2f ns/op\n", $e2);
printf("Median mismatch at last position : %.2f ns/op\n", $l2);
printf("Ratio (late/early) : %.2fx\n", $l2 / $e2);
Step 3, run it three times to confirm the result is reproducible and not noise:
$ php timing_poc2.php
Actual output, run 1:
=== Length 4096 bytes, establishes the primitive is not constant time ===
Median mismatch at position 0 : 13.83 ns/op
Median mismatch at last position : 338.58 ns/op
Ratio (late/early) : 24.48x
=== Length 32 bytes, the actual Grav nonce length, md5 hex output ===
Median mismatch at position 0 : 14.13 ns/op
Median mismatch at last position : 17.41 ns/op
Ratio (late/early) : 1.23x
Actual output, run 2:
=== Length 4096 bytes, establishes the primitive is not constant time ===
Median mismatch at position 0 : 14.25 ns/op
Median mismatch at last position : 333.99 ns/op
Ratio (late/early) : 23.44x
=== Length 32 bytes, the actual Grav nonce length, md5 hex output ===
Median mismatch at position 0 : 13.83 ns/op
Median mismatch at last position : 17.24 ns/op
Ratio (late/early) : 1.25x
Actual output, run 3:
=== Length 4096 bytes, establishes the primitive is not constant time ===
Median mismatch at position 0 : 14.20 ns/op
Median mismatch at last position : 336.89 ns/op
Ratio (late/early) : 23.73x
=== Length 32 bytes, the actual Grav nonce length, md5 hex output ===
Median mismatch at position 0 : 13.98 ns/op
Median mismatch at last position : 17.39 ns/op
Ratio (late/early) : 1.24x
Interpretation, stated honestly. At 4096 bytes the effect is unambiguous and consistent across three independent runs, a mismatch near the end of the string takes about 23 to 24 times longer to reject than a mismatch at the very first byte, which is direct proof === is not constant time in this PHP build. At the real nonce length of 32 bytes the same direction of effect is present and reproducible across all three runs, roughly a 1.24x ratio, about 3 to 4 nanoseconds difference per comparison, but the signal is much smaller in absolute terms. I want to be direct about what this does and does not show. It proves the comparison used by verifyNonce() is not constant time and therefore not the right primitive for comparing secrets, which is why hash_equals() exists and is already used elsewhere in this codebase for the same category of check. It does not by itself prove a practical remote timing attack against a live Grav install, since a real attack would need to extract a nanosecond scale signal through normal HTTP round trip jitter, which is a much harder, though not unprecedented, condition and would need many repeated requests with statistical averaging per byte guessed. I did not attempt that network level attack since I do not have a live target instance.
Impact
verifyNonce() is Grav's documented core primitive for CSRF protection, used directly by core and referenced by the plugin ecosystem, including the Form plugin and Admin plugin, both outside this repository. Because the comparison is not constant time, an attacker in a position to send many requests and measure response timing with enough precision could in principle recover a valid nonce byte by byte rather than needing to guess the full 32 character value at once, weakening the CSRF protection below its intended security margin. The practical difficulty of pulling this off over a real network, given millisecond scale jitter against a nanosecond scale signal, is high, which is why I am reporting this as a hardening issue rather than claiming a demonstrated working exploit against a live site.
Suggested fix
Replace the two === comparisons in verifyNonce() with hash_equals(), matching the pattern already used in Session.php, FileCache.php, Scheduler.php, and JobQueue.php:
public static function verifyNonce($nonce, $action)
{
if (is_array($nonce)) {
$nonce = array_shift($nonce);
}
if (!is_string($nonce)) {
return false;
}
if (hash_equals(self::getNonce($action), $nonce)) {
return true;
}
return hash_equals(self::getNonce($action, true), $nonce);
}
hash_equals() also correctly requires the first argument to be a string, so the existing implicit array-to-string edge cases are worth double checking when you make this change.
=========================================================== CWE FIELD
CWE-208, Observable Timing Discrepancy
=========================================================== CVSS CALCULATOR SELECTIONS (v3.1)
Attack Vector: Network Attack Complexity: High Privileges Required: None User Interaction: None Scope: Unchanged Confidentiality: None Integrity: Low Availability: None
Resulting vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N Resulting score: 5.3, severity Medium
Note for the maintainer: Attack Complexity is set to High because, as shown above, the measured timing signal at the real nonce length is small, on the order of a few nanoseconds, so reliable remote exploitation would require substantial statistical averaging and a favorable network position. If your own testing shows this is easier to exploit against a real deployment than my local measurement suggests, please rescore Attack Complexity to Low.
=========================================================== SEVERITY FIELD
Moderate
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐘Packagist | getgrav/grav | all versions | 2.0.16composer require getgrav/grav:^2.0.16 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for getgrav/grav, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update getgrav/grav to 2.0.16 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg 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 GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg across Packagist dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.