Skip to content

GHSA-6c8g-9hfh-pq5h CVE-2026-46395

HAXcms: Private Key Disclosure via Broken HMAC Implementation

Critical npm
Severity
0.0 / 10
Critical · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.29%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 22.15% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
CWE-321 Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key
CWE-327 Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm
Fix
26.0.0
Upgrade @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs to this version or later

Description

Summary

The hmacBase64() function in the HAXcms Node.js backend contains two critical cryptographic implementation errors that together allow any unauthenticated attacker to extract the system’s private signing key and forge arbitrary admin-level JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) allowing them to get full admin access with a single HTTP request.

Details

Bug 1: Hardcoded HMAC Key (line 2160): The function passes the literal string "0" as the HMAC signing key instead of the key parameter, making every HAXcms instance compute identical HMACs for the same input.

Bug 2: Private Key Appended to Output (lines 2161- 2163): After computing the HMAC, the function concatenates the real key parameter which is "this.privateKey + this.salt", the system’s master signing secret is directly onto the output. The combined buffer is base64-encoded and returned as the token.

Every base64url token produced has the same structure: 32 bytes HMAC keyed with "0" and N bytes of privateKey+salt. An attacker base64-decodes any token, discards the first 32 bytes, and reads the private key directly.

The /system/api/connectionSettings endpoint is unauthenticated and returns multiple tokens generated by this function. A single GET request to this endpoint exposes the private key.

The PHP backend (HAXCMS.php:1619-1631) implements this function correctly with the actual key and returns only the hash. The PHP version produces 44-character tokens whereas the broken Node.js version produces 139+ character tokens.

PoC

  1. GET request to /system/api/connectionSettings endpoint and fetch the token.
  2. Extract the private key from the fetched token. The hmacBase64() function produces 32 bytes with HMAC-SHA256 with hardcoded key "0" and the rest of the bytes are privateKey+salt (plaintext). Decode the Base64 token, discard the first 32 bytes, read the remaining bytes as UTF-8 (this is your extracted private key).
  3. Since JWT's are signed with privateKey+salt, use this stolen private key to forge a JWT for admin using JWT.sign(payload, this.privateKey+this.salt). NOTE: the payload uses {id, user (set this as admin), iat (current timestamp), exp (expiration timestamp)}
  4. The same key can also be used to create other tokens (user_token, base_token, form_token, etc).
  5. Use these forged tokens to hit all authenticated endpoints (modify/delete/create etc) with admin privileges.

Impact

An unauthenticated attacker can perform the complete attack chain with a single HTTP request:

  1. Extract private key: GET "/system/api/connectionSettings", base64-decode any token, discard first 32 bytes.
  2. Forge admin JWT: sign arbitrary JWT payloads with the stolen privateKey+salt.
  3. Forge all request tokens: compute valid user_token, site_token for any API call.
  4. Full admin access: create/modify/delete sites, upload files, modify content.

This works even if the admin has changed the default credentials to a strong password. The forged tokens produce no login events in logs.

Affected versions

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
@haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
< 26.0.0
26.0.0

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

@haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs npm → 26.0.0

npm
npm install @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs@26.0.0
yarn
yarn add @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs@26.0.0
pnpm
pnpm add @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs@26.0.0

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
High
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

Weakness

CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor

The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.

CWE-321: Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key

The product uses a hard-coded, unchangeable cryptographic key.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Prevention schemes mirror that of hard-coded password storage.

CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis. For example, US government systems require FIPS 140-2 certification [REF-1192]. Do not develop custom or private cryptographic algorithms. They will likely be exposed to attacks that are well-understood by cryptographers. Reverse engineering techniques are mature. If the algorithm can be compromised if attackers find out how it works, then it is especially weak. Periodically ensure that the cryptography has not become obsolete. Some older algorithms, once thought to require a billion years of computing time, can now be broken in days or hours. This includes MD4, MD5, SHA1, DES, and other algorithms that were once regarded as strong. [REF-267]
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms. With hardware, design the product at the Intellectual Property (IP) level so that one cryptographic algorithm can be replaced with another in the next generation of the hardware product.
  • Architecture and Design: Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Industry-standard implementations will save development time and may be more likely to avoid errors that can occur during implementation of cryptographic algorithms. Consider the ESAPI Encryption feature.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: When using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-g2g8-95qg-v35h
HaxCMS has a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) bypass in its saveNode endpoint
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-9r33-xhw8-4qqp
HAX CMS: Denial of Service using Malicious Import Request
Medium Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-x3x5-7h4h-gwxg
HAXcms: Mass Token Exfiltration and Cross-Tenant Hijack
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-jh3h-rpxg-fr36
Stored XSS via <iframe> in HAX CMS allows access to sensitive client-side data and account takeover
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-2m6p-hm3w-6jm3
HAX CMS: Stored XSS via '<video-player>' component allows arbitrary JavaScript execution and token theft
Medium Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-q862-gcgq-5m6g
HAXcms createSite SSRF Enables Arbitrary File Read
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-3fm2-xfq7-7778
HAXcms Has Stored XSS Vulnerability that May Lead to Account Takeover
Medium Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-9jr9-8ff3-m894
HAX CMS API Lacks Authorization Checks
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor