CVE-2026-55250 — Maravel-Framework Token Replay Vulnerability via Premature JWT Blacklist Eviction in Tagged Caches
Maravel, a PHP framework oriented towards dependency injection, prior to version 10.74.0 has a high-severity Token Replay Vulnerability arising from a structural lifecycle mismatch between stateless token validation engines and high-performance relational caching layers. Any application with low cache memory that causes premature eviction to free up memory and applications running macropay-solutions/maravel-framework that utilize tymon/jwt-auth for API token authentication and blacklist management or any other package that does the same may be affected. This architectural risk might also impact native Laravel applications utilizing cache tags under specific volatile or eviction-capped environments. tymon/jwt-auth automatically probes for cache tag support. If found, it forcefully wraps 14-day token blacklist entries (jti) inside a relational tymon.jwt tag. In environments where the O(1) Atomic Lazy Eviction model is active — either natively inside Maravel-Framework v20.x or manually backported into v10.x via the explicit DI container singletons provided in PR #104 (App\Cache\TaggedCache and App\Cache\TagSet) — a strict global tracking ceiling (Container::TAGGED_CACHE_TTL_CAP_SECONDS) of 7,200 seconds (2 hours) is enforced to secure the system against memory index bloat. This ceiling forcefully truncates the 14-day blacklist lifespan down to a maximum of 2 hours, after which individual tracking keys naturally expire and disappear from the active cache window. Furthermore, because the optimized engine implements a generational version matrix to achieve O(1) flush speeds, any programmatic or manual invocation of a tag flush or reset (e.g., Cache::tags([...])->flush()) instantly bumps the internal atomic master version pointer. This shifts the computed cryptographic composite hash (sha1($this->tags->getNamespace())) for all overlapping components, rendering the entire existing index immediately unreachable. Consequently, through either natural 2-hour expiration or an intervening tag flush execution (like the cache naturally cleaning old values to free up memory), the invalidation state records are entirely wiped out. Because the tokens' physical cryptographic signatures remain structurally valid for up to 14 days, stolen, hijacked, or legitimately logged-out tokens are instantly and silently resurrected across the entire API gateway, leaving the application critically vulnerable to widespread Token Replay Attacks. Because this issue is caused by an upstream architectural assumption within the tymon/jwt-auth package rather than a core defect inside the framework, there is no direct framework version upgrade that can safely bypass this lifecycle collision without breaking business cache recycling bounds. Maravel version 10.74.0 introduced a way to backport the new fixed tagged cache from 20.x into 10.x by resolving TagSet and TaggedCache from DI, which is how this latent architectural lifecycle vulnerability was discovered. Users must apply the decoupled configuration workaround outlined below. As a workaround, make sure that cache memory size does not generate early natural evictions from cache to free up space, deleting blacklisted jwt ids before they expire. Applications must decouple flat authentication vectors from the relational tagging subsystem. This forces token identifiers to write directly to the primary cache keyspace as flat, un-tagged key-value pairs where they securely retain their unclipped 14-day lifecycle.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.9% (30-day exploitation probability)+9
- Technical severity (high)+6
- Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3
The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.
CISA SSVC assessment CISA
Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Macropay-solutions Maravel-framework).
- The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
- No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (authentication), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macropay-solutions | Maravel-framework | version < 10.74.0 | Vulnerable | CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.7 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 8.7 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
- Review authentication logs: logins without MFA, anomalous sessions and recently created accounts.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · macropay-solutions/maravel-framework
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 8.7
- Source status changed · → Deferred
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
References
3 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- Medium CVE-2026-53933 Maravel-Framework Vulnerable to Side-Channel Information Disclosure (Error Oracle) via Dynamic Route Fuzzing Sep 8, 2026
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record
Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-55250 is "Maravel-Framework Token Replay Vulnerability via Premature JWT Blacklist Eviction in Tagged Caches", rated High. It affects Maravel-framework (Macropay-solutions); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.7 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.87% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.
Comments
Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.
No comments yet.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.