Pocket ID is an OIDC provider that allows users to authenticate with their passkeys to services.
CVE-2026-62662 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in pocket-id, with a CVSS 3.0 base score of 7.7 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with administrator privileges, without any action from a user. Affected pocket-id versions: >= 1.11.0, < 2.10.0. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.27% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of pocket-id you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- HighSuccess depends on conditions outside the attacker's control.
- Privileges required
- HighAdministrator-level access is required first.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- ChangedThe attack can reach beyond the vulnerable component into other systems.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N. Scored by CNA (github.com).
Official description
Pocket ID is an OIDC provider that allows users to authenticate with their passkeys to services. From 1.11.0 until 2.10.0, createTokenFromClientCredentials in backend/internal/service/oidc_service.go accepts the client-controlled resource parameter and embeds it directly in the access token aud claim without validating that the audience is registered or that the requesting client may access it. Any authenticated OIDC client can therefore obtain a Pocket ID-signed token naming another client or an arbitrary audience. The /api/oidc/introspect endpoint cannot distinguish the unauthorized token because it treats a token as active when the introspecting client's identifier matches the attacker-selected audience. In deployments where resource servers trust Pocket ID access tokens for service-to-service authorization, this bypasses audience-based access controls and can permit unauthorized data access or actions; deployments that do not use these tokens for resource-server authorization have no immediate exploitable impact. This issue is fixed in version 2.10.0.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in pocket-id
- 9.6 Critical severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.