Skip to main content

CVE detail

CVE-2026-27840

ZITADEL is an open source identity management platform. Starting in version 2.31.0 and prior to versions 3.4.7 and 4.11.0, opaque OIDC access tokens in the v2 format truncated to 80 characters are still considered valid. Zitadel uses a symmetric AES encryption for opaque tokens. The cleartext payload is a concatenation of a couple of identifiers, such as a token ID and user ID. Internally Zitadel has 2 different versions of token payloads. v1 tokens are no longer created, but are still verified as to not invalidate existing session after upgrade. The cleartext payload has a format of `<token_id>:<user_id>`. v2 tokens distinguished further where the `token_id` is of the format `v2_<oidc_session_id>-at_<access_token_id>`. V1 token authZ/N session data is retrieved from the database using the (simple) `token_id` value and `user_id` value. The `user_id` (called `subject` in some parts of our code) was used as being the trusted user ID. V2 token authZ/N session data is retrieved from the database using the `oidc_session_id` and `access_token_id` and in this case the `user_id` from the token is ignored and taken from the session data in the database. By truncating the token to 80 chars, the user_id is now missing from the cleartext of the v2 token. The back-end still accepts this for above reasons. This issue is not considered exploitable, but may look awkward when reproduced. The patch in versions 4.11.0 and 3.4.7 resolves the issue by verifying the `user_id` from the token against the session data from the database. No known workarounds are available.

CVSS 4.3 · MediumBuzz score 18.9

Buzz score

Why this CVE is surfacing

Buzz score total 18.9

This all-time snapshot uses the same composite formula as Trending across a 30-year evidence window, rather than a current rolling window.

Buzz score components · mention 13.9 · diversity 5.0 · KEV 0.0 · OTX 0.0 · PoC 0.0
Mention score
13.9
3 evidence mentions in the snapshot
Diversity score
5.0
1 sources across 1 categories
KEV score
0.0
No KEV entry observed
OTX score
0.0
0 OTX pulses
PoC score
0.0
0 repos · best confidence N/A
Best PoC traction
0
Maximum stars on a matched PoC repo

Why it matters now

Mention timeline

Total mentions
0
within the 30d window
Peak daily
0
highest bucket

Evidence

Source links by recency

Newest mentions first
3 source links · newest first

Exploit code

Public exploit repository references

Public PoC repositories are third-party, potentially unsafe artifacts. Treat their code as untrusted and use it only on authorized systems in an isolated, least-privilege environment. cvebuzz does not execute the code or verify that an exploit works.

0 repository references · best confidence N/A · max 0 stars
No public PoC repositories have been matched yet.

Related records

Similar CVEs

6 related CVEs with shared weakness or product evidence