Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-65015

CriticalPublic PoCDDoS

Published: 18 November 2025

Published
18 November 2025
Modified
15 January 2026
KEV Added
Patch
CVSS Score v4 9.2 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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
EPSS Score 0.0008 23.6th percentile
Risk Priority 18 60% EPSS · 20% KEV · 20% CVSS

Summary

CVE-2025-65015 is a critical-severity Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (CWE-770) vulnerability in Hsiaoming Joserfc. Its CVSS base score is 9.2 (Critical).

Operationally, ranked at the 23.6th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability details

joserfc is a Python library that provides an implementation of several JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) standards. In versions from 1.3.3 to before 1.3.5 and from 1.4.0 to before 1.4.2, the ExceededSizeError exception messages are embedded with non-decoded JWT…

more

token parts and may cause Python logging to record an arbitrarily large, forged JWT payload. In situations where a misconfigured — or entirely absent — production-grade web server sits in front of a Python web application, an attacker may be able to send arbitrarily large bearer tokens in the HTTP request headers. When this occurs, Python logging or diagnostic tools (e.g., Sentry) may end up processing extremely large log messages containing the full JWT header during the joserfc.jwt.decode() operation. The same behavior also appears when validating claims and signature payload sizes, as the library raises joserfc.errors.ExceededSizeError() with the full payload embedded in the exception message. Since the payload is already fully loaded into memory at this stage, the library cannot prevent or reject it. This issue has been patched in versions 1.3.5 and 1.4.2.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

No named actor attribution yet. ATT&CK technique mapping in progress for this CVE.

Affected Assets

hsiaoming
joserfc
1.3.3 — 1.3.5 · 1.4.0 — 1.4.2

Mitigating Controls

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

addresses: CWE-770

This control implements explicit throttling on session allocation, addressing the weakness of allocating resources without limits.

addresses: CWE-770

Plan testing exercises resource allocation limits and throttling during simulated failures, directly addressing weaknesses that allow unbounded resource use.

addresses: CWE-770

Contingency plan updates ensure recovery strategies address unbounded resource allocation, making it harder for attackers to exploit lack of throttling to cause prolonged outages.

addresses: CWE-770

Provides continuity when unbounded resource allocation at the primary site leads to exhaustion and downtime.

addresses: CWE-770

Alternate services allow operations to continue when primary allocation of resources lacks limits or throttling.

addresses: CWE-770

Explicit planning of security-related actions requires defining limits, windows, and resource allocations, making allocation without throttling far less likely.

addresses: CWE-770

Measures of performance include tracking allocation behavior and throttling effectiveness, reducing the window for resource exhaustion attacks.

addresses: CWE-770

Imposes an inactivity-based limit on network resource allocation, throttling the number of concurrently held connections.

References