implementing-jwt-signing-and-verification
Implements secure JWT (RFC 7519) signing and verification using HMAC-SHA256, RSA-PSS, ES256, and EdDSA, including token expiration, claims validation, and defenses against algorithm-confusion, none-algorithm, and key-injection attacks. Use when adding or hardening JWT-based authentication/authorization, or when auditing token verification code for common JWT vulnerabilities.
- License 许可
- Apache-2.0
- 最近更新
- 2026-08-31
- Stars
- ★ 3.6w
- Forks
- 4.4k
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- implementing-jwt-signing-and-verification
- tags
- [ "cryptography", "jwt", "authentication", "token-security", "digital-signatures" ]
- author
- mahipal
- domain
- cybersecurity
- license
- Apache-2.0
- version
- 1.0
- nist_csf
- [ "PR.DS-01", "PR.DS-02", "PR.DS-10" ]
- subdomain
- cryptography
- description
- Implements secure JWT (RFC 7519) signing and verification using HMAC-SHA256, RSA-PSS, ES256, and EdDSA, including token expiration, claims validation, and defenses against algorithm-confusion, none-algorithm, and key-injection attacks. Use when adding or hardening JWT-based authentication/authorization, or when auditing token verification code for common JWT vulnerabilities.
- mitre_attack
- [ "T1600", "T1573", "T1553" ]
02 资源文件 7
- 资产文件assets/template.md1.2 KB
- 许可证LICENSE11.0 KB
- 参考文档references/api-reference.md1.6 KB
- 参考文档references/standards.md1.2 KB
- 参考文档references/workflows.md1.1 KB
- 脚本scripts/agent.py7.3 KB
- 脚本scripts/process.py10.7 KB
03 SKILL.md 正文
Implementing JWT Signing and Verification
Overview
JSON Web Tokens (JWT) defined in RFC 7519 are compact, URL-safe tokens used for authentication and authorization in web applications. This skill covers implementing secure JWT signing with HMAC-SHA256, RSA-PSS, and EdDSA algorithms, along with verification, token expiration, claims validation, and defense against common JWT attacks (algorithm confusion, none algorithm, key injection).
When to Use
- When deploying or configuring implementing jwt signing and verification capabilities in your environment
- When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements
- When building or improving security architecture for this domain
- When conducting security assessments that require this implementation
Prerequisites
- Familiarity with cryptography concepts and tools
- Access to a test or lab environment for safe execution
- Python 3.8+ with required dependencies installed
- Appropriate authorization for any testing activities
Objectives
- Implement JWT signing with HS256, RS256, ES256, and EdDSA
- Verify JWT signatures and validate standard claims
- Implement token expiration, not-before, and audience validation
- Defend against algorithm confusion and none algorithm attacks
- Implement JWT key rotation with JWK Sets
- Build a complete authentication middleware
Key Concepts
JWT Algorithms
| Algorithm | Type | Key | Security Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| HS256 | Symmetric (HMAC) | Shared secret | 128-bit |
| RS256 | Asymmetric (RSA) | RSA key pair | 112-bit |
| ES256 | Asymmetric (ECDSA) | P-256 key pair | 128-bit |
| EdDSA | Asymmetric (Ed25519) | Ed25519 pair | 128-bit |
Common JWT Attacks
- Algorithm confusion: Switching from RS256 to HS256, using public key as HMAC secret
- None algorithm: Setting alg=none to bypass signature verification
- Key injection: Embedding key in JWK header
- Weak secrets: Brute-forcing short HMAC secrets
- Token replay: Reusing valid tokens without expiration
Security Considerations
- Always validate the algorithm header against an allowlist
- Never accept alg=none in production
- Use asymmetric algorithms (RS256, ES256) for distributed systems
- Set short expiration times (15 min for access tokens)
- Implement token refresh mechanism
- Store secrets securely (not in source code)
Validation Criteria
- [ ] JWT signing produces valid tokens for all algorithms
- [ ] Signature verification rejects tampered tokens
- [ ] Expired tokens are rejected
- [ ] Algorithm confusion attack is prevented
- [ ] None algorithm is rejected
- [ ] JWK key rotation works correctly
- [ ] Claims validation enforces all required claims
04 同仓库更多 Skills
verifying-build-provenance-with-slsa-sigstore
Verifies artifact signatures and SLSA provenance using Sigstore's cosign (verify, verify-attestation, verify-blob-attestation) and slsa-verifier (verify-artifact), enforcing keyless OIDC builder identity and source repo against SLSA Build levels. Use in CI/CD before deploying artifacts, when consuming third-party attestations, establishing a SLSA Build L3 pipeline, or confirming provenance during incident response or admission control.
validating-tpm-measured-boot-attestation
Verifies TPM 2.0 measured-boot integrity and remote attestation with tpm2-tools -- reading PCRs (tpm2_pcrread), replaying the boot event log, generating and checking signed quotes (tpm2_quote/tpm2_checkquote), and sealing secrets to a PCR policy. Use to confirm a system booted trusted firmware/kernel for Zero Trust device posture, detect boot-chain tampering via PCR drift, or build a golden-value baseline for fleet attestation.
validating-backup-integrity-for-recovery
Validates backup integrity through cryptographic hash verification, automated restore testing, corruption detection, and recoverability checks to confirm backups are reliable for disaster recovery and ransomware response. Use before relying on backups for recovery, when building post-backup validation pipelines, auditing backup infrastructure for compliance, or checking immutable/air-gapped backups for silent corruption or tampering.
triaging-windows-with-kape
Runs KAPE (Kroll Artifact Parser and Extractor) to collect targeted forensic artifacts (registry hives, $MFT, event logs, prefetch, browser data) via Targets and parse them with Modules wrapping Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools (PECmd, MFTECmd, RECmd). Use during early incident containment/triage when full disk imaging is impractical but a defensible, parseable Windows artifact set is needed quickly, including at-scale remote collection.
triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework
Triages and prioritizes vulnerabilities with CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree, weighing exploitation status (via the CISA KEV catalog and FIRST EPSS API), technical impact, automatability, and mission prevalence to output Track/Track*/Attend/Act decisions. Use when prioritizing vulnerability scan results (OpenVAS, Nessus, Qualys) for remediation planning beyond raw CVSS scores.
triaging-security-incident
Performs initial triage of security incidents using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks, classifying incident type, assigning priority by business impact, and routing to the appropriate response team. Use when a SIEM/EDR alert needs human classification, concurrent alerts must be prioritized, or a user report or threat-intel IOC match requires initial incident categorization.