Skip to content

CVE-2026-48522

Is CVE-2026-48522 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
4.2 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.2%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-441
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

scanner noise

anonymous, aggregated from real reports · via Denoizr
ScannerFlagged inTurned out noise
Mend2 scans0%

How often this CVE was flagged by each scanner and how much turned out to be noise (false positives), aggregated anonymously from de-noised reports. Higher noise means the alert is more often not a real risk — verify your exposure.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

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

PyJWT is a JSON Web Token implementation in Python. Prior to 2.13.0, PyJWKClient passes its uri argument directly to urllib.request.urlopen() which uses Python stdlib's default OpenerDirector registering HTTPHandler, HTTPSHandler, FTPHandler, FileHandler, and DataHandler. There is currently no documented option to restrict which schemes PyJWKClient will fetch. If an application's jku URL ingestion path accepts attacker-influenced URLs (e.g., from JWT header, configuration file, OAuth flow parameter), the attacker can cause PyJWKClient to read arbitrary local files via file:// (SSRF on local filesystem), cause PyJWKClient to attempt FTP / data-URI fetches (broader SSRF surface), or forge tokens that PyJWT verifies as valid. The library does not directly return non-HTTP(S) URI contents to the attacker; the chained "plant a JWKS to forge tokens" scenario described in the original report requires additional application-layer flaws (attacker write access to a filesystem path, untrusted jku derivation) that this fix does not address. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.13.0.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-48522
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-48522/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-48522)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-48522"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-48522/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-48522"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.