feat(deps): update dependency jsonwebtoken to v9 [security]

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Change	Age	Adoption	Passing	Confidence
jsonwebtoken	8.5.1 -> 9.0.0

GitHub Vulnerability Alerts

CVE-2022-23539

Overview

Versions <=8.5.1 of jsonwebtoken library could be misconfigured so that legacy, insecure key types are used for signature verification. For example, DSA keys could be used with the RS256 algorithm.

Am I affected?

You are affected if you are using an algorithm and a key type other than the combinations mentioned below

Key type	algorithm
ec	ES256, ES384, ES512
rsa	RS256, RS384, RS512, PS256, PS384, PS512
rsa-pss	PS256, PS384, PS512

And for Elliptic Curve algorithms:

alg	Curve
ES256	prime256v1
ES384	secp384r1
ES512	secp521r1

How do I fix it?

Update to version 9.0.0. This version validates for asymmetric key type and algorithm combinations. Please refer to the above mentioned algorithm / key type combinations for the valid secure configuration. After updating to version 9.0.0, If you still intend to continue with signing or verifying tokens using invalid key type/algorithm value combinations, you’ll need to set the allowInvalidAsymmetricKeyTypes option to true in the sign() and/or verify() functions.

Will the fix impact my users?

There will be no impact, if you update to version 9.0.0 and you already use a valid secure combination of key type and algorithm. Otherwise, use the allowInvalidAsymmetricKeyTypes option to true in the sign() and verify() functions to continue usage of invalid key type/algorithm combination in 9.0.0 for legacy compatibility.

CVE-2022-23541

Overview

Versions <=8.5.1 of jsonwebtoken library can be misconfigured so that passing a poorly implemented key retrieval function (referring to the secretOrPublicKey argument from the readme link) will result in incorrect verification of tokens. There is a possibility of using a different algorithm and key combination in verification than the one that was used to sign the tokens. Specifically, tokens signed with an asymmetric public key could be verified with a symmetric HS256 algorithm. This can lead to successful validation of forged tokens.

Am I affected?

You will be affected if your application is supporting usage of both symmetric key and asymmetric key in jwt.verify() implementation with the same key retrieval function.

How do I fix it?

Update to version 9.0.0.

Will the fix impact my users?

There is no impact for end users

CVE-2022-23529

Overview

For versions <=8.5.1 of jsonwebtoken library, if a malicious actor has the ability to modify the key retrieval parameter (referring to the secretOrPublicKey argument from the readme link) of the jwt.verify() function, they can gain remote code execution (RCE).

Am I affected?

You are affected only if you allow untrusted entities to modify the key retrieval parameter of the jwt.verify() on a host that you control.

How do I fix it?

Update to version 9.0.0

Will the fix impact my users?

The fix has no impact on end users.

Credits

Palo Alto Networks

CVE-2022-23540

Overview

In versions <=8.5.1 of jsonwebtoken library, lack of algorithm definition and a falsy secret or key in the jwt.verify() function can lead to signature validation bypass due to defaulting to the none algorithm for signature verification.

Am I affected?

You will be affected if all the following are true in the jwt.verify() function:

• a token with no signature is received
• no algorithms are specified
• a falsy (e.g. null, false, undefined) secret or key is passed

How do I fix it?

Update to version 9.0.0 which removes the default support for the none algorithm in the jwt.verify() method.

Will the fix impact my users?

There will be no impact, if you update to version 9.0.0 and you don’t need to allow for the none algorithm. If you need 'none' algorithm, you have to explicitly specify that in jwt.verify() options.

---

Release Notes

auth0/node-jsonwebtoken

v9.0.0

Compare Source

Breaking changes: See Migration from v8 to v9

Breaking changes

• Removed support for Node versions 11 and below.
• The verify() function no longer accepts unsigned tokens by default. ([8345030]auth0/node-jsonwebtoken@8345030)
• RSA key size must be 2048 bits or greater. ([ecdf6cc]auth0/node-jsonwebtoken@ecdf6cc)
• Key types must be valid for the signing / verification algorithm

Security fixes

• security: fixes Arbitrary File Write via verify function - CVE-2022-23529
• security: fixes Insecure default algorithm in jwt.verify() could lead to signature validation bypass - CVE-2022-23540
• security: fixes Insecure implementation of key retrieval function could lead to Forgeable Public/Private Tokens from RSA to HMAC - CVE-2022-23541
• security: fixes Unrestricted key type could lead to legacy keys usage - CVE-2022-23539

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "" (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate. View repository job log here.

[reviewflow]

Progress

☑️ Step 1: ✏️ Write code
☑️ Step 2: 💚 Checks
☑️ Step 3: 👌 Code Review
⬜ Step 4: 🚦 Merging Pull Request

Options:

• 🚦 automerge: Automatically merge when this PR is ready and has no failed statuses. When the repository requires branches to be up to date before merging, it merges default branch, with a queue per repo to prevent multiple merges when several PRs are ready. A fail job prevents the merge.
• 🚦 skip-ci: Add [skip ci] on merge commit when merge is done with autoMerge.
• ♻️ Automatically delete the branch after this PR is merged. (⚠️ Legacy Option: Delete branch with Github Setting)

Actions:

• 🐛 Force updating reviewflow checks for this PR. Use this to try to fix reviewflow checks that are still missing/pending, which might happen if webhook failed or something bad happened when reviewflow tried to send the status check to github.
• 🔄 update branch: Merge base branch in this PR's branch. Only works if merging is possible without conflicts.