Every CVE Search/ Get API key

CVE-2026-44523

Note Mark: JWT Secret Weakness allows Full Account Takeover via token forgery

10.0 CriticalFix available

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to 0.19.4, no minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4.

Attack profile

How easy it is to exploit

Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges needed
None
User interaction
None

What an attacker can affect

Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Exploit likelihood

0.15%Up 0.1 points since May 15, 2026
90%50%10%1%

What each source reports

CVE List Score used 10.0

Note Mark: JWT Secret Weakness allows Full Account Takeover via token forgery

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to 0.19.4, no minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4.

Record
CVE-2026-44523
CVSS 3.1
10.0 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-326, CWE-345
Updated
2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-30367 10.0

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to 0.19.4, no minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4.

Record
EUVD-2026-30367
CVSS 3.1
10.0 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Updated
2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-q6mh-rqwh-g786 10.0

Note Mark has a JWT Secret Weakness that allows Full Account Takeover via Token Forgery

Summary

No minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte.

HS256 secrets below 32 bytes are brute-forceable offline, allowing attackers to recover the signing key and forge valid JWTs for arbitrary users.

Impact

An attacker who captures a single valid JWT (e.g, from cookies, logs, or network traffic) can:

> Crack the signing secret offline using brute-force or wordlist attacks > Forge valid JWTs for any user ID (including administrators) > Authenticate without knowing any credentials

This results in full account takeover across the entire application with no server-side detection or rate limiting possible.

Details

In backend/config/utils.go, the Base64Decoded.UnmarshalText function decodes the JWT secret but does not validate its length or entropy.

In backend/core/auth.go, JWT tokens are signed using HS256 without enforcing minimum key size requirements.

According to RFC 7518 Section 3.2, HS256 keys must be at least 256 bits (32 bytes). Libraries such as PyJWT explicitly warn against shorter keys, but note-mark performs no such validation.

PoC

1- Deploy note-mark with a weak secret:

JWT_SECRET = base64("testsecret123456789012345")

2- Register an account and capture the Auth-Session-Token cookie

3- Crack the secret offline (example using Python):

import jwt, base64
jwt.decode(TOKEN, base64.b64decode(SECRET), algorithms=["HS256"])

4- Forge a new token for any user UUID with extended expiry

5- Send the forged token in requests → server returns 200 Ok and authenticates as that user

Reproduction Steps

1- Deploy the application with a JWT secret shorter than 32 bytes (after base64 decoding) 2- Authenticate and capture a valid JWT 3- Perform offline brute-force or dictionary attack against the token signature 4- Recover the secret 5- Generate a forged JWT for another user 6- Use the forged token to access protected endpoints

Fix Recommendation

  • Enforce a minimum of 32 bytes (256 bits) for JWT secrets after base64 decoding
  • Reject weak secrets during configuration parsing (e.g., in Base64Decoded.UnmarshalText or config validation)
  • Optionally log warnings or fail startup if the secret is insecure

Resources

  • RFC 7518 Section 3.2 (JSON Web Algorithms - HMAC key size requirements)
  • CWE-326: Inadequate Encryption Strength
  • CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
Record
GHSA-q6mh-rqwh-g786
CVSS 3.1
10.0 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-326, CWE-345
Updated
2026-11-02
NVD 10.0

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to 0.19.4, no minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4.

Record
CVE-2026-44523
CVSS 3.1
10.0 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-326, CWE-345
Updated
2026-11-02
OSV 10.0

Note Mark: JWT Secret Weakness allows Full Account Takeover via token forgery

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to 0.19.4, no minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4.

Record
CVE-2026-44523
CVSS 3.1
10.0 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-326, CWE-345
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-q6mh-rqwh-g786 10.0

Note Mark has a JWT Secret Weakness that allows Full Account Takeover via Token Forgery

Summary

No minimum length or entropy is enforced on the JWT_SECRET configuration value. The application accepts any base64-decodable secret regardless of size, including secrets as short as 1 byte.

HS256 secrets below 32 bytes are brute-forceable offline, allowing attackers to recover the signing key and forge valid JWTs for arbitrary users.

Impact

An attacker who captures a single valid JWT (e.g, from cookies, logs, or network traffic) can:

> Crack the signing secret offline using brute-force or wordlist attacks > Forge valid JWTs for any user ID (including administrators) > Authenticate without knowing any credentials

This results in full account takeover across the entire application with no server-side detection or rate limiting possible.

Details

In backend/config/utils.go, the Base64Decoded.UnmarshalText function decodes the JWT secret but does not validate its length or entropy.

In backend/core/auth.go, JWT tokens are signed using HS256 without enforcing minimum key size requirements.

According to RFC 7518 Section 3.2, HS256 keys must be at least 256 bits (32 bytes). Libraries such as PyJWT explicitly warn against shorter keys, but note-mark performs no such validation.

PoC

1- Deploy note-mark with a weak secret:

JWT_SECRET = base64("testsecret123456789012345")

2- Register an account and capture the Auth-Session-Token cookie

3- Crack the secret offline (example using Python):

import jwt, base64
jwt.decode(TOKEN, base64.b64decode(SECRET), algorithms=["HS256"])

4- Forge a new token for any user UUID with extended expiry

5- Send the forged token in requests → server returns 200 Ok and authenticates as that user

Reproduction Steps

1- Deploy the application with a JWT secret shorter than 32 bytes (after base64 decoding) 2- Authenticate and capture a valid JWT 3- Perform offline brute-force or dictionary attack against the token signature 4- Recover the secret 5- Generate a forged JWT for another user 6- Use the forged token to access protected endpoints

Fix Recommendation

  • Enforce a minimum of 32 bytes (256 bits) for JWT secrets after base64 decoding
  • Reject weak secrets during configuration parsing (e.g., in Base64Decoded.UnmarshalText or config validation)
  • Optionally log warnings or fail startup if the secret is insecure

Resources

  • RFC 7518 Section 3.2 (JSON Web Algorithms - HMAC key size requirements)
  • CWE-326: Inadequate Encryption Strength
  • CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
Record
GHSA-q6mh-rqwh-g786
CVSS 3.1
10.0 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-326, CWE-345
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVGO-2026-5567 No score

Note Mark has a JWT Secret Weakness that allows Full Account Takeover via Token Forgery in github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend

Note Mark has a JWT Secret Weakness that allows Full Account Takeover via Token Forgery in github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend

Record
GO-2026-5567
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVopenSUSE-SU-2026:21483-1 No score

Security update for govulncheck-vulndb

This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:

  • Update to version 0.0.20260723T184607 2026-07-23T18:46:07Z (jsc#PED-11136).

Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:

  • GO-2026-4730 CVE-2026-33022 GHSA-cv4x-93xx-wgfj
  • GO-2026-4761 CVE-2026-33211 GHSA-j5q5-j9gm-2w5c
  • GO-2026-5102 CVE-2026-45021 GHSA-3vcp-chfh-f6r2
  • GO-2026-5272 CVE-2026-40938 GHSA-94jr-7pqp-xhcq
  • GO-2026-5486 CVE-2026-40924 GHSA-m2cx-gpqf-qf74
  • GO-2026-5542 CVE-2026-40090 GHSA-pj97-4p9w-gx3q
  • GO-2026-5630 CVE-2026-25542 GHSA-rmx9-2pp3-xhcr
  • GO-2026-5643 CVE-2026-40923 GHSA-rx35-6rhx-7858
  • GO-2026-5675 CVE-2026-41492 GHSA-vvf7-6rmr-m29q
  • GO-2026-5711 CVE-2026-40161 GHSA-wjxp-xrpv-xpff
  • GO-2026-5746 CVE-2026-41567 GHSA-x86f-5xw2-fm2r
  • GO-2026-5749 CVE-2026-41328 GHSA-x92x-px7w-4gx4
  • GO-2026-5837 CVE-2026-44840 GHSA-q2m9-6jp9-c6mc
  • GO-2026-5929 CVE-2026-44342 GHSA-26v7-h57m-gh9m
  • GO-2026-5930 CVE-2026-33655 GHSA-6qcr-qxgr-m7fv
  • GO-2026-5933 GHSA-3g4q-2f67-2gvh
  • GO-2026-5934 GHSA-59qp-cfj3-rp64
  • GO-2026-5935 GHSA-7856-g3gv-9wq8
  • GO-2026-5936 CVE-2026-53552 GHSA-26rh-24rg-j3vv
  • GO-2026-5937 CVE-2026-53508 GHSA-2jcc-mxv7-p3f9
  • GO-2026-5938 CVE-2026-53553 GHSA-4g5x-hcwm-82jw
  • GO-2026-5939 CVE-2026-10517 GHSA-698x-9w2p-7vvp
  • GO-2026-5940 CVE-2026-53572 GHSA-6w3m-4hhp-775q
  • GO-2026-5941 CVE-2026-53487 GHSA-gvhc-wv3v-7pf8
  • GO-2026-5942 CVE-2026-46600
  • GO-2026-5944 CVE-2026-50197 GHSA-659f-rgp5-w4wf
  • GO-2026-5945 CVE-2026-6815 GHSA-rmxx-v9rj-vpvg
  • GO-2026-5946 CVE-2026-52831 GHSA-v5px-423j-pf7p
  • GO-2026-5947 CVE-2026-53649 GHSA-xqhv-chqm-fhcc
  • GO-2026-5948 CVE-2026-50554 GHSA-588f-fvcv-xhvf
  • GO-2026-5949 CVE-2026-50553 GHSA-rqrh-8wpv-x7hh
  • GO-2026-5950 CVE-2026-53602 GHSA-339v-266x-79xr
  • GO-2026-5951 CVE-2026-10219 GHSA-6jm8-4fhr-5w64
  • GO-2026-5952 CVE-2026-49834 GHSA-9vcr-p3rj-q5q6
  • GO-2026-5953 CVE-2026-9094 GHSA-c9w5-qp6m-m395
  • GO-2026-5956 CVE-2026-55252 GHSA-h5g6-xmh4-hc37
  • GO-2026-5957 CVE-2026-54158 GHSA-5xfx-xj4h-5p7r
  • GO-2026-5958 CVE-2026-54068 GHSA-gcm7-57gf-953c
  • GO-2026-5959 CVE-2026-54072 GHSA-h29v-hj44-q8cv
  • GO-2026-5961 CVE-2026-54069 GHSA-hvr9-72v2-fff3
  • GO-2026-5962 CVE-2026-54088 GHSA-m93h-4hw7-5qcm
  • GO-2026-5963 CVE-2026-54067 GHSA-mvjr-vv3c-w4qv
  • GO-2026-5964 CVE-2026-54066 GHSA-p4m3-mgmm-c664
  • GO-2026-5965 CVE-2026-54070 GHSA-w7cg-whh7-xp28
  • GO-2026-5966 CVE-2026-54089 GHSA-xqp3-jq6g-x3qm
  • GO-2026-5967 CVE-2026-50551 GHSA-56mp-4f3v-fgj2
  • GO-2026-5968 CVE-2026-54174 GHSA-fpg8-7664-jc5q
  • GO-2026-5969 GHSA-g936-7jqj-mwv8
  • GO-2026-5970 CVE-2026-56852
  • GO-2026-5973 CVE-2026-54250 GHSA-jxr7-mqhw-9p98
  • GO-2026-5974 CVE-2026-44300 GHSA-wmj8-9953-vff5
  • GO-2026-5975 CVE-2026-50018 GHSA-42j2-w334-qxw7
  • GO-2026-5976 CVE-2026-50141 GHSA-g7mm-9vx7-jm7h
  • GO-2026-5977 CVE-2026-50013 GHSA-qrh4-p6v4-mrfg
  • GO-2026-5978 CVE-2026-50125 GHSA-qw5r-ppcg-f8rj
  • GO-2026-5979 CVE-2026-50006 GHSA-xrcf-6jh3-ggvx
  • GO-2026-5980 CVE-2026-50158 GHSA-2c7f-fxww-6w6c
  • GO-2026-5981 GHSA-mqxv-9rm6-w8qc
  • GO-2026-5982 GHSA-pqg7-v6wh-3pfp
  • GO-2026-5984 CVE-2026-53604 GHSA-2p2f-px33-4vv5
  • GO-2026-5985 GHSA-7rx3-5wx3-5v76
  • GO-2026-5986 CVE-2026-61699 GHSA-cm26-5974-52h8
  • GO-2026-5987 CVE-2026-55513 GHSA-g4x6-jcvr-9m3g
  • GO-2026-5988 CVE-2026-54628 GHSA-hwrq-8wxh-q4xv
  • GO-2026-5989 CVE-2026-55512 GHSA-m3cx-mwpg-32jg
  • GO-2026-5990 CVE-2026-54629 GHSA-mf78-3rpf-r784
  • GO-2026-5991 CVE-2026-53603 GHSA-q4vm-pq3q-8wgq
  • GO-2026-5992 CVE-2026-61549 GHSA-qf34-295c-26v8
  • GO-2026-5996 CVE-2026-54450 GHSA-pph6-vfjv-vpjw
  • GO-2026-5997 CVE-2026-54452 GHSA-xgch-x3mx-cm3c
  • GO-2026-5998 CVE-2026-54495 GHSA-398h-7f66-3h4p
  • GO-2026-5999 CVE-2026-10814 GHSA-jh6h-v6mp-h22v
  • GO-2026-6002 CVE-2026-58196 GHSA-pr64-jmmf-jp54
  • GO-2026-6003 CVE-2026-53714 GHSA-22xc-xg2r-9j7v
  • GO-2026-6004 CVE-2026-52833 GHSA-3v79-m2cg-89ww
  • GO-2026-6005 CVE-2026-53715 GHSA-8fv2-88gg-hm7q
  • GO-2026-6006 CVE-2026-53716 GHSA-cxpq-8v7q-cg56 *…
Record
openSUSE-SU-2026:21483-1
Updated
2026-11-02

Affected products

Affected packages

Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend
Go
 before 0.0.0-20260501152247-18b587758667
0.0.0-20260501152247-18b587758667
govulncheck-vulndb
openSUSE:Leap 16.0
From an advisory covering 1734 CVEs
 before 0.0.20260723T184607-160000.1.1
0.0.20260723T184607-160000.1.1

History

History
RecordedChangedSources
affected, facts
first indexedCVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV

Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.

In short

CVE-2026-44523 is a critical vulnerability (CVSS 10.0) in Enchant97 Note-mark, published May 7, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.15%, the 4th percentile. Fixed in github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend 0.0.0-20260501152247-18b587758667.

References

Show 194 moreShow less
This page doesn't list everything

Left out here: 1,541 references and the rest of 1 source description. The JSON record has them.

Pages All vulnerabilities Browse Docs Sources Guide Get API key
MoveEnter Open