GHSA-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 — flowise
MEDIUMGHSA-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.6) CWE-321 vulnerability in flowise. A fix is available for flowise — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Flowise: Weak Default JWT Secrets
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- 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.
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8.
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-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 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 377,636 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
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.
flowisenpmDescription
Detection Method: Kolega.dev Deep Code Scan
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Severity | Critical |
| Location | packages/server/src/enterprise/middleware/passport/index.ts:29-34 |
| Practical Exploitability | High |
| Developer Approver | [email protected] |
Description
JWT secrets have weak hardcoded defaults ('auth_token', 'refresh_token', 'AUDIENCE', 'ISSUER'). Attackers can forge valid JWTs and impersonate any user.
Affected Code
const jwtAudience = process.env.JWT_AUDIENCE || 'AUDIENCE'
const jwtIssuer = process.env.JWT_ISSUER || 'ISSUER'
const jwtAuthTokenSecret = process.env.JWT_AUTH_TOKEN_SECRET || 'auth_token'
const jwtRefreshSecret = process.env.JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_SECRET || process.env.JWT_AUTH_TOKEN_SECRET || 'refresh_token'
Evidence
All JWT defaults are weak strings. Refresh token falls back to auth token which is a design flaw. If any environment variable is unset, weak default is used.
Impact
Complete authentication bypass. Attackers can forge valid JWTs for any user account. No authentication required to access protected endpoints. Can escalate to admin access.
Recommendation
Remove all default secrets - require all JWT environment variables to be explicitly set. Add startup validation throwing error if any JWT secret is missing. Use cryptographically random secrets (256+ bits) for each secret independently. Implement JWT secret rotation mechanism.
Notes
The JWT secrets have genuinely weak hardcoded defaults ('auth_token', 'refresh_token', 'AUDIENCE', 'ISSUER') at lines 29-34. If an administrator deploys without setting the environment variables JWT_AUTH_TOKEN_SECRET, JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_SECRET, JWT_AUDIENCE, and JWT_ISSUER, the application will use these trivially guessable values. An attacker knowing these defaults (which are publicly visible in the source code) can forge valid JWTs to impersonate any user, including administrators. The fallback chain at line 34 where jwtRefreshSecret falls back to jwtAuthTokenSecret is an additional design weakness - if only JWT_AUTH_TOKEN_SECRET is set, both tokens share the same secret. While .env.example files provide placeholder values, these are also weak and publicly visible. The application should fail to start if these secrets are not explicitly configured with strong values, rather than silently falling back to insecure defaults.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | flowise | all versions | 3.1.0npm install flowise@3.1.0 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for flowise, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update flowise to 3.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 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-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8. 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-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-cc4f-hjpj-g9p8 across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.