CVE-2026-47410

CRITICALPre-NVD 9.89.8
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This critical-severity CVE scores 9.8 under the CNA's CVSS (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.1%, top 82% of all CVEs by exploit prediction. GitHub Security Advisory data not yet ingested — confidence will rise once GHSA publishes (typical lag: hours to days for open-source ecosystem CVEs; never for infrastructure-only CVEs).

Triggered by: NVD CVSS baseline
Sources: cna:github_m, epss
9.8
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS: 0%CVSS: 9.8Exploit: NoneExposed: 0

No vendor fix yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for a patch.

praisonai-platform: JWT signing key defaults to hardcoded "dev-secret-change-me", allowing token forgery for any user when PLATFORM_ENV is unset

Summary

Type: Insecure default cryptographic key. The JWT signing secret defaults to the hardcoded literal "dev-secret-change-me" when PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET is unset. A safety check exists but only fires when PLATFORM_ENV != "dev"; the default value of PLATFORM_ENV is "dev", so the check is silently bypassed in any deployment that does not explicitly opt out. The attacker reads the literal from this public source file, mints a JWT with arbitrary sub and email claims, and authenticates as any existing user (including workspace owners and admins). File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py, lines 25-36 and 114-137. Root cause: the production-mode guard checks os.environ.get("PLATFORM_ENV", "dev") != "dev" — but the default is "dev", so a clean deployment that just imports the package and runs uvicorn praisonai_platform.api.app:app proceeds with the hardcoded secret. The package documentation does not warn loudly enough that BOTH variables must be set; the guard suppresses itself when either condition is missed. JWT verification at line 129 trusts whatever the token says (sub, email, name) once the HMAC-SHA256 signature validates against the publicly-known secret. Since the verifier accepts forged tokens for any user_id, the attacker becomes that user across every authenticated route.

Affected Code

File: src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py, lines 25-36 and 114-137.

_DEFAULT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me"
JWT_SECRET = os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET", _DEFAULT_SECRET)            # <-- BUG: silent fallback
JWT_ALGORITHM = "HS256"
JWT_TTL_SECONDS = int(os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_TTL", str(30 * 24 * 3600)))

if JWT_SECRET == _DEFAULT_SECRET and os.environ.get("PLATFORM_ENV", "dev") != "dev": raise RuntimeError( # <-- only fires if PLATFORM_ENV is non-default "PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET must be set to a strong random value in production. " "Set PLATFORM_ENV=dev to suppress this check during development." )

...

def _issue_token(self, user: User) -> str: payload = { "sub": user.id, "email": user.email, "name": user.name, "iat": now, "exp": now + timedelta(seconds=JWT_TTL_SECONDS), } return jwt.encode(payload, JWT_SECRET, algorithm=JWT_ALGORITHM) # signs with the hardcoded secret

def _verify_token(self, token: str) -> Optional[AuthIdentity]: try: payload = jwt.decode(token, JWT_SECRET, algorithms=[JWT_ALGORITHM]) # verifies with the hardcoded secret return AuthIdentity( id=payload["sub"], # <-- attacker chooses sub type="user", email=payload.get("email"), name=payload.get("name"), ) except jwt.InvalidTokenError: return None

Why it's wrong: the guard's predicate is wrong. The intent — "warn loudly if a production deployment ships without setting the secret" — is correct, but the implementation requires the operator to set BOTH variables (PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET and PLATFORM_ENV != "dev") for the guard to fire. A common deployment misconfiguration is to set only one (or neither): pip install praisonai-platform, uvicorn praisonai_platform.api.app:app --host 0.0.0.0, done. The package starts with no warning, the JWT signing key is the literal string sitting in this source file, and any attacker who reads the GitHub repo can forge tokens. The standard pattern is to fail-closed at import time when the secret is the default, regardless of any environment variable. The code at line 32-36 inverts that: it fails-open by default and only fails-closed when the operator opts in.

Exploit Chain

  • Attacker reads auth_service.py:25 from the public GitHub repo (MervinPraison/PraisonAI) and notes _DEFAULT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me". State: attacker holds the JWT signing key.
  • Attacker identifies a target deployment of praisonai-platform (Shodan search for the FastAPI route /auth/me, the praisonai_platform user-agent, or any indexed installation). Attacker registers a free account at POST /auth/register to confirm the deployment is live and to obtain at least one valid JWT token whose structure they can copy. State: attacker holds a live account.
  • Attacker enumerates the platform's user IDs via any of the IDOR primitives filed as separate advisories (issue created_by, agent owner_id, comment author_id, member list via the workspace-member-IDOR), or simply queries /auth/me with their own token to learn the UUID format. State: attacker has a target user UUID T_id (e.g. a workspace owner of any tenant).
  • Attacker forges a JWT:
import jwt, time
   payload = {"sub": "T_id", "email": "[email protected]", "name": "victim",
              "iat": int(time.time()), "exp": int(time.time()) + 3600}
   token = jwt.encode(payload, "dev-secret-change-me", algorithm="HS256")
State: attacker holds a JWT that the deployment's _verify_token will accept as authentic.
  • Attacker sends GET /auth/me with Authorization: Bearer . _verify_token decodes the token using JWT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me", the HMAC matches, an AuthIdentity(id="T_id", ...) is returned. The route resolves the actual User row by User.id == "T_id" and returns the victim's record. State: attacker is authenticated as the victim.
  • Attacker pivots: POST /workspaces/{id}/members to add themselves as owner (chaining with the companion priv-esc advisory becomes redundant — the attacker is already the victim), PATCH /workspaces/{id} to flip settings, DELETE /workspaces/{id} to wipe data, or simply GET /workspaces/{id}/issues/... to exfiltrate everything the victim could read.
  • Final state: full account takeover for any user_id on any deployment that did not explicitly set both PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET and PLATFORM_ENV=production. No prior auth, no user interaction, no special network position required.

Security Impact

Severity: sec-critical. CVSS 9.8: network attack, low complexity, no privileges, no user interaction, scope unchanged (the JWT layer is the same component the attacker pivots through), high confidentiality, high integrity, high availability (chaining with delete_workspace from the companion advisory). Attacker capability: mint a JWT for any user_id on the deployment with the public secret, becoming that user across every authenticated route. No prior authentication required — the attacker only needs the package to be deployed and reachable. This is a pre-auth full account takeover. Preconditions: praisonai-platform is deployed without explicitly setting BOTH PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET AND PLATFORM_ENV=. The default deployment pattern (pip install, uvicorn ...) hits this. The attacker needs network reachability to the API. Differential: source-inspection-verified end-to-end. The asymmetry is between the documented intent of the guard (warn in production) and its actual semantics (warn only when the operator sets PLATFORM_ENV to a non-"dev" value). With the suggested fix below, the guard fails-closed: any deployment that did not set PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET raises at import time, regardless of PLATFORM_ENV. The forged-token attack returns None from _verify_token because the signing key the attacker used ("dev-secret-change-me") no longer matches the deployment's secret.

Suggested Fix

Fail-closed at import time when the secret is the default, irrespective of PLATFORM_ENV. Permit explicit dev-mode opt-in with a separate variable that is NEVER the default.

--- a/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py
+++ b/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/auth_service.py
@@ -23,12 +23,16 @@
 _pwd_context = CryptContext(schemes=["bcrypt"], deprecated="auto")

-_DEFAULT_SECRET = "dev-secret-change-me" -JWT_SECRET = os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET", _DEFAULT_SECRET) +JWT_SECRET = os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET") JWT_ALGORITHM = "HS256" JWT_TTL_SECONDS = int(os.environ.get("PLATFORM_JWT_TTL", str(30 * 24 * 3600)))

-if JWT_SECRET == _DEFAULT_SECRET and os.environ.get("PLATFORM_ENV", "dev") != "dev":

  • raise RuntimeError(
  • "PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET must be set to a strong random value in production. "
  • "Set PLATFORM_ENV=dev to suppress this check during development."
  • )
+if not JWT_SECRET: + if os.environ.get("PRAISONAI_PLATFORM_ALLOW_INSECURE_JWT") != "1": + raise RuntimeError( + "PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET must be set to a strong random value (min 32 bytes). " + "For local development, set PRAISONAI_PLATFORM_ALLOW_INSECURE_JWT=1 to " + "auto-generate an ephemeral random secret per process." + ) + import secrets + JWT_SECRET = secrets.token_urlsafe(32) + # ephemeral; tokens issued before restart will not validate after restart + import warnings + warnings.warn("Using ephemeral JWT secret; set PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET in production")

The guard now fails-closed: an unset PLATFORM_JWT_SECRET raises at import unless the operator explicitly opts into dev mode with a separate variable. The dev-mode path generates a per-process random secret instead of using a hardcoded one, so even leaked dev-mode tokens cannot be used against another deployment. Add a startup banner that prints the JWT secret's hash prefix (not the secret itself) so operators can confirm at runtime which key is in use.

CVSS v3
9.8
EG Score
9.8(low)
EPSS
17.6%
KEV
Not listed

Published

May 29, 2026

Last Modified

May 29, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-47410(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
PyPI(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFixed inDependents
praisonai-platform0.1.0, 0.1.1, 0.1.2, 0.1.30.1.4

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 6× in last 7d / 61× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 153 total refreshes for this CVE.

  1. 2026-07-16 01:45 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-07-14 18:29 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-07-14 13:44 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-07-12 01:09 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-07-11 21:04 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-07-11 16:53 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-07-08 22:42 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-07-08 17:15 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-07-02 23:00 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-07-02 18:56 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-07-02 12:48 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-07-02 08:08 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-07-02 03:41 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-07-01 21:15 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-07-01 16:44 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-07-01 12:40 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-07-01 08:36 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-07-01 01:17 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-06-30 05:36 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-06-30 00:48 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-06-29 20:33 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-06-29 16:30 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-06-29 12:26 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-06-29 02:39 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-06-28 22:30 UTCEG score recompute
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-06-28 18:26 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-06-28 14:10 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-06-28 10:03 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-06-28 05:57 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-06-28 01:54 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-06-27 21:50 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-06-27 17:44 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-06-27 13:40 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-06-27 09:30 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-06-27 05:26 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-06-27 01:23 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-06-26 20:13 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-06-26 16:10 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-06-26 03:32 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-06-25 23:27 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-06-25 19:23 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-06-25 15:20 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-06-25 11:14 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-06-25 07:10 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-06-25 02:37 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-06-24 22:31 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-06-24 15:09 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-06-24 02:40 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-06-18 22:20 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-06-18 10:15 UTCEG score recompute
  26. 2026-06-18 01:47 UTCEG score recompute
  27. 2026-06-17 21:43 UTCEG score recompute
  28. 2026-06-17 17:40 UTCEG score recompute
  29. 2026-06-17 11:44 UTCEG score recompute
  30. 2026-06-17 07:41 UTCEG score recompute
  31. 2026-06-17 03:24 UTCEG score recompute
  32. 2026-06-16 23:20 UTCEG score recompute
  33. 2026-06-16 19:11 UTCEG score recompute
  34. 2026-06-16 15:04 UTCEG score recompute
  35. 2026-06-16 09:09 UTCEG score recompute
  36. 2026-06-16 04:37 UTCEG score recompute
  37. 2026-06-16 00:29 UTCEG score recompute
  38. 2026-06-15 20:25 UTCEG score recompute
  39. 2026-06-15 13:23 UTCEG score recompute
  40. 2026-06-15 09:19 UTCEG score recompute
  41. 2026-06-15 05:14 UTCEG score recompute
  42. 2026-06-15 01:11 UTCEG score recompute
  43. 2026-06-14 23:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  44. 2026-06-14 21:07 UTCEG score recompute
  45. 2026-06-14 17:04 UTCEG score recompute
  46. 2026-06-14 12:56 UTCEG score recompute
  47. 2026-06-14 08:52 UTCEG score recompute
  48. 2026-06-14 04:49 UTCEG score recompute
  49. 2026-06-14 00:39 UTCEG score recompute
  50. 2026-06-13 23:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  51. 2026-06-13 20:36 UTCEG score recompute
  52. 2026-06-13 16:32 UTCEG score recompute
  53. 2026-06-13 12:27 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-06-13 08:18 UTCEG score recompute
  55. 2026-06-13 04:13 UTCEG score recompute
  56. 2026-06-13 00:09 UTCEG score recompute
  57. 2026-06-12 23:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  58. 2026-06-12 20:05 UTCEG score recompute
  59. 2026-06-12 16:02 UTCEG score recompute
  60. 2026-06-12 11:58 UTCEG score recompute
  61. 2026-06-12 07:53 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-06-12 03:50 UTCEG score recompute
  63. 2026-06-11 23:46 UTCEG score recompute
  64. 2026-06-11 19:43 UTCEG score recompute
  65. 2026-06-11 15:39 UTCEG score recompute
  66. 2026-06-11 11:19 UTCEG score recompute
  67. 2026-06-11 07:15 UTCEG score recompute
  68. 2026-06-11 03:11 UTCEG score recompute
  69. 2026-06-10 23:08 UTCEG score recompute
  70. 2026-06-10 19:04 UTCEG score recompute
  71. 2026-06-10 15:01 UTCEG score recompute
  72. 2026-06-10 10:57 UTCEG score recompute
  73. 2026-06-10 06:54 UTCEG score recompute
  74. 2026-06-10 02:51 UTCEG score recompute
  75. 2026-06-09 22:47 UTCEG score recompute

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-47410?
CVE-2026-47410 is a critical vulnerability published on May 29, 2026. praisonai-platform: JWT signing key defaults to hardcoded "dev-secret-change-me", allowing token forgery for any user when PLATFORM_ENV is unset Summary Type: Insecure default cryptographic key. The JWT signing secret defaults to the hardcoded literal "dev-secret-change-me" when PLATFORMJWTSECRET…
When was CVE-2026-47410 disclosed?
CVE-2026-47410 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on May 29, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-47410 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-47410 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 17.6% percentile likelihood of exploitation in the next 30 days — higher percentiles indicate greater predicted risk.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-47410?
CVE-2026-47410 has a CVSS v4.0 base score of 9.8 (CNA self-assessment; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-47410?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-47410, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-47410

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-47410?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.