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

GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g — hono

HIGHFix: honojs/hono@45ba3bf

GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g is a high-severity (CVSS 8.1) CWE-285 vulnerability in hono. A fix is available for hono — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Hono Improper Authorization vulnerability

Also known asCVE-2025-62610
Published
Oct 22, 2025
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 25, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • 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-m732-5p4w-x69g.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs30th percentile — riskier than 30% 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

GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g 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.

6Kother npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream
hononpm
59.2Mdownloads / week

Description

Improper Authorization in Hono (JWT Audience Validation)

Hono’s JWT authentication middleware did not validate the aud (Audience) claim by default. As a result, applications using the middleware without an explicit audience check could accept tokens intended for other audiences, leading to potential cross-service access (token mix-up).

The issue is addressed by adding a new verification.aud configuration option to allow RFC 7519–compliant audience validation. This change is classified as a security hardening improvement, but the lack of validation can still be considered a vulnerability in deployments that rely on default JWT verification.

Recommended secure configuration

You can enable RFC 7519–compliant audience validation using the new verification.aud option:

import { Hono } from 'hono'
import { jwt } from 'hono/jwt'

const app = new Hono()

app.use(
  '/api/*',
  jwt({
    secret: 'my-secret',
    verification: {
      // Require this API to only accept tokens with aud = 'service-a'
      aud: 'service-a',
    },
  })
)

Below is the original description by the reporter. For security reasons, it does not include PoC reproduction steps, as the vulnerability can be clearly understood from the technical description.


The original description by the reporter

Summary

Hono’s JWT Auth Middleware does not provide a built-in aud (Audience) verification option, which can cause confused-deputy / token-mix-up issues: an API may accept a valid token that was issued for a different audience (e.g., another service) when multiple services share the same issuer/keys. This can lead to unintended cross-service access. Hono’s docs list verification options for iss/nbf/iat/exp only, with no aud support; RFC 7519 requires that when an aud claim is present, tokens MUST be rejected unless the processing party identifies itself in that claim.

Note: This problem likely exists in the JWK/JWKS-based middleware as well (e.g., jwk / verifyWithJwks)

Details

  • The middleware’s verifyOptions enumerate only iss, nbf, iat, and exp; there is no aud option. The same omission appears in the JWT Helper’s “Payload Validation” list. Developers relying on the middleware for complete standards-aligned validation therefore won’t check audience by default.
  • Standards requirement: RFC 7519 §4.1.3 states that each principal intended to process the JWT MUST identify itself with a value in the aud claim; if it does not, the JWT MUST be rejected (when aud is present). Lack of a first-class aud check increases the risk that tokens issued for Service B are accepted by Service A.
  • Real-world effect: In deployments with a single IdP/JWKS and shared keys across multiple services, a token minted for one audience can be mistakenly accepted by another audience unless developers implement a custom audience check.
    • For example, with Google Identity (OIDC), iss is always https://accounts.google.com (shared across apps), but aud differs per application because it is that app’s OAuth client ID; therefore, an attacker can host a separate service that supports “Sign in with Google,” obtain a valid ID token (JWT) for the victim user, and—if your API does not verify aud—use that token to access your API with the victim’s privileges.

Impact

Type: Authentication/authorization weakness via token mix-up (confused-deputy).

Who is impacted: Any Hono user who:

  • shares an issuer/keys across multiple services (common with a single IdP/JWKS)
  • distinguishes tokens by intended recipient using aud.

What can happen:

  • Cross-service access: A token for Service B may be accepted by Service A.
  • Boundary erosion: ID tokens and access tokens, or separate API audiences, can be inadvertently intermixed.
    • This may causes unauthorized invocation of sensitive endpoints.

Recommended remediation:

  1. Add verifyOptions.aud (string | string[] | RegExp) to the middleware and enforce RFC 7519 semantics: In verify method, if aud is present and does not match with specified audiences, reject.
  2. Ensure equivalent aud handling exists in the JWK/JWKS flow (jwk middleware / verifyWithJwks) so users of external IdPs can enforce audience consistently.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
📦npmhono≥ 1.1.0&&< 4.10.24.10.2npm install hono@4.10.2

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

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

  2. Fix

    Update hono to 4.10.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. 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.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Improper Authorization in Hono (JWT Audience Validation) Hono’s JWT authentication middleware did not validate the `aud` (Audience) claim by default. As a result, applications using the middleware without an explicit audience check could accept tokens intended for other audiences, leading to potential cross-service access (token mix-up). The issue is addressed by adding a new `verification.aud` configuration option to allow RFC 7519–compliant audience validation. This change is classified as a **security hardening improvement**, but the lack of validation can still be considered a vulner
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g: hono (High 8.1) | O3 Security