Vulnerability Database

383,304

Total vulnerabilities in the database

Centrifugo's InsecureSkipTokenSignatureVerify flag silently disables JWT verification with no warning — github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v6

Improper Authorization

Summary

Centrifugo supports a configuration flag insecure_skip_token_signature_verify that completely disables JWT signature verification. When enabled, Centrifugo accepts any JWT token regardless of signature validity — including tokens signed with wrong keys, random signatures, or no signature at all. Critically, no warning is logged at startup or runtime when this flag is active, making it invisible to operators and security auditors.

Note: This vulnerability requires the operator to have explicitly set insecure_skip_token_signature_verify=true. The core issue is the absence of any warning when this flag is active, making accidental production exposure undetectable.

Details

The flag is defined in internal/configtypes/types.go:

InsecureSkipTokenSignatureVerify bool `mapstructure:"insecure_skip_token_signature_verify"`

It is passed directly to token verification in internal/client/handler.go:

token, err := h.tokenVerifier.VerifyConnectToken(e.Token, cfg.Client.InsecureSkipTokenSignatureVerify)

In token_verifier_jwt.go, when skipVerify=true the entire signature block is bypassed:

if !skipVerify { // This block never executes err = verifier.verifySignature(token) }

The flag is configurable via multiple vectors making accidental exposure likely:

  • Config file: insecure_skip_token_signature_verify: true
  • Environment variable: CENTRIFUGO_INSECURE_SKIP_TOKEN_SIGNATURE_VERIFY=true
  • YAML, TOML config formats

Despite hmac_secret_key being configured, startup logs show "enabled JWT verifiers" — falsely implying verification is active.

PoC

Config with legitimate HMAC key but skip flag enabled:

{ "client": { "insecure_skip_token_signature_verify": true, "token": { "hmac_secret_key": "legitimate-production-secret-key" } } }

Token signed with completely wrong key is fully accepted:

VULNERABILITY CONFIRMED! Connected as user: {'client': '899dec73...', 'version': '0.0.0 OSS'}

No security warning emitted when insecure_skip_token_signature_verify=true: 1

Token signed with wrong key accepted, authentication bypass confirmed: 2

skipVerify flag propagated from config to all token verification calls: 3

Impact

  • Any unauthenticated user can connect as any arbitrary user ID
  • Complete authentication bypass — attacker sets any sub claim value
  • No indicators in logs that the server is operating insecurely
  • Easily triggered accidentally via environment variable injection in containerized deployments (e.g. misconfigured Kubernetes secrets)
  • Affects all connection types: WebSocket, HTTP-streaming, SSE, GRPC

Suggested Fix

  1. Emit a loud startup warning when flag is enabled:
if cfg.Client.InsecureSkipTokenSignatureVerify { log.Warn().Msg("SECURITY WARNING: JWT signature verification is " + "DISABLED via insecure_skip_token_signature_verify - " + "DO NOT use in production!") }
  1. Consider requiring an additional explicit insecure_mode: true flag to prevent accidental single-flag misconfiguration
  2. Log a warning on every accepted token when skip is active
  • Published: Mar 13, 2026
  • Updated: Mar 14, 2026
  • GHSA: GHSA-q926-c743-49qj
  • Severity: Low
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: Unknown
  • Score:
  • AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:N

CWEs:

OWASP TOP 10:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.