CVE Tools

CVE-2026-53939

OpenIDC/cjose uses all-zero Content Encryption Key for AES-CBC-HMAC JWE encryption

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 21st percentile. No fix published yet.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

What to do

No fixed build or workaround is published yet. Limit exposure and watch for a patch.

What it is

From the CVE record

OpenIDC/cjose is a C library implementing the Javascript Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE). In versions 0.6.1 through 0.6.2.5, when cjose encrypts a JWE using an AES-CBC-HMAC content-encryption algorithm (`A128CBC-HS256`, `A192CBC-HS384`, or `A256CBC-HS512`) together with any key-management algorithm that generates a fresh content-encryption key (CEK), the CEK is all zero bytes instead of being randomly generated. The resulting JWE is therefore encrypted and authenticated under a fixed, publicly known key, so anyone who obtains the JWE can recover the plaintext and forge or modify the content. This is fixed in version 0.6.2.6 by `_cjose_jwe_set_cek_aes_cbc()` generating the CEK from `RAND_bytes`. A regression test asserts that the `encrypted_key` differs across two encryptions for each AES-CBC-HMAC variant. Until upgrading, for data encrypted with cjose, three options are available. Use an AES-GCM `enc` (`A128GCM` / `A192GCM` / `A256GCM`) instead of an AES-CBC-HMAC `enc`, use `alg=dir` with a caller-supplied CEK, or avoid using cjose for JWE encryption with the affected algorithm pair. These are mitigations for new ciphertexts only; data already encrypted under the zero key remains compromised and should be re-encrypted (and any secrets it contained rotated).

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS21st
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

0.3% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 21st percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

7 events over 9 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. OpenVAS check added
  2. Record updated
  3. Record updatedrecord updated
  4. Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Scored 9.1 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
  • Attack Complexity LowNo special conditions — the attack can be reliably reproduced
  • Privileges Required NoneNo authentication required — anyone can exploit this
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
  • Integrity HighTotal loss of integrity — attacker can modify any data in the component
  • Availability NoneNo availability impact

Weaknesses

ATT&CK techniques

Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Cjose, not every advisory.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store