CVE-2026-48522VulnerabilityPublished 19 Jun 2026Updated 12 Oct 2026

SUSE kimi-cli · Security update for python-PyJWT

Affects SUSE kimi-cliSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-48522· Medium 4.2

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.2 Medium · fixed in SUSE package updates : update SUSE kimi-cli when convenient.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 20:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.2Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 12% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.44.0_1, 1.53.0, 3.15.2_2 +1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 28 May 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 31 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewkimi-cli`pkg:brew/kimi-cli`Other threats	Affected >=1.44.0 <1.44.0_1	Fixed in 1.44.0_1
Homebrewggshield`pkg:brew/ggshield`Other threats	Affected >=1.19.1 <1.53.0	Fixed in 1.53.0
Homebrewcycode`pkg:brew/cycode`Other threats	Affected >=1.10.3 <3.15.2_2	Fixed in 3.15.2_2
Homebrewmcpm`pkg:brew/mcpm`Other threats	Affected <2.15.0_2	Fixed in 2.15.0_2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

A patch is available that adds an allowed_schemes parameter to PyJWKClient, restricting URL schemes to http and https. Applications should upgrade to a fixed version of PyJWT that includes this patch or implement URL scheme validation to reject non-http(s) schemes before passing URLs to PyJWKClient. This prevents SSRF and token forgery via disallowed URL schemes.

Description

PyJWKClient in the kimi-cli library allows fetching JSON Web Key Sets (JWKS) from URLs with schemes beyond HTTP and HTTPS, including file://, ftp://, and data:. This can lead to server-side request forgery (SSRF) on local files and other protocols. An attacker who can influence the jku URL and write to a local file path can forge JWT tokens that the application accepts as valid. The vulnerability affects PyJWT versions 2.11.0 and 2.12.1 and likely earlier versions. A fix is available that restricts allowed URL schemes to HTTP and HTTPS.

Impact

The vulnerability allows an attacker to perform SSRF attacks via file://, ftp://, and data: schemes, potentially reading arbitrary local files. More critically, if the attacker can write to a file path referenced by the jku URL, they can plant a malicious JWKS and forge JWT tokens that the application will accept as valid, compromising authentication and authorization. The severity is rated medium with a CVSS score of 4.2.

Summary

PyJWKClient passes the jku URL directly to Python's urllib.request.urlopen(), which by default supports multiple URL schemes including file://, ftp://, and data:. This lack of scheme restriction allows an attacker who can control the jku URL to cause PyJWKClient to read arbitrary local files or fetch from other protocols, resulting in SSRF. Furthermore, if the attacker can write a malicious JWKS file to a location referenced by a file:// URL, they can forge JWT tokens that PyJWT will verify as valid. This issue was empirically verified on PyJWT 2.11.0 and 2.12.1. Other JWT libraries do not exhibit this behavior as they restrict URL schemes to HTTP(S). The recommended fix is to add an allowed_schemes parameter to PyJWKClient to restrict URL schemes to http and https, raising an error if disallowed schemes are used.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Oct 2026, 21:48 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats