Maravel, a PHP framework oriented towards dependency injection, prior to version 10.74.0 has a high-severity Token Replay Vulnerability arising from a structural lifecycle mismatch between stateless token validation engines and high-performance relational caching layers. Any application with low cache memory that causes premature eviction to free up memory and applications running macropay-solutions/maravel-framework that utilize tymon/jwt-auth for API token authentication and blacklist management or any other package that does the same may be affected. This architectural risk might also impact native Laravel applications utilizing cache tags under specific volatile or eviction-capped environments. tymon/jwt-auth automatically probes for cache tag support. If found, it forcefully wraps 14-day token blacklist entries (jti) inside a relational tymon.jwt tag. In environments where the O(1) Atomic Lazy Eviction model is active — either natively inside Maravel-Framework v20.x or manually backported into v10.x via the explicit DI container singletons provided in PR #104 (App\Cache\TaggedCache and App\Cache\TagSet) — a strict global tracking ceiling (Container::TAGGED_CACHE_TTL_CAP_SECONDS) of 7,200 seconds (2 hours) is enforced to secure the system against memory index bloat. This ceiling forcefully truncates the 14-day blacklist lifespan down to a maximum of 2 hours, after which individual tracking keys naturally expire and disappear from the active cache window. Furthermore, because the optimized engine implements a generational version matrix to achieve O(1) flush speeds, any programmatic or manual invocation of a tag flush or reset (e.g., Cache::tags([...])->flush()) instantly bumps the internal atomic master version pointer. This shifts the computed cryptographic composite hash (sha1($this->tags->getNamespace())) for all overlapping components, rendering the entire existing index immediately unreachable. Consequently, through either natural 2-hour expiration or an intervening tag flush execution (like the cache naturally cleaning old values to free up memory), the invalidation state records are entirely wiped out. Because the tokens' physical cryptographic signatures remain structurally valid for up to 14 days, stolen, hijacked, or legitimately logged-out tokens are instantly and silently resurrected across the entire API gateway, leaving the application critically vulnerable to widespread Token Replay Attacks. Because this issue is caused by an upstream architectural assumption within the tymon/jwt-auth package rather than a core defect inside the framework, there is no direct framework version upgrade that can safely bypass this lifecycle collision without breaking business cache recycling bounds. Maravel version 10.74.0 introduced a way to backport the new fixed tagged cache from 20.x into 10.x by resolving TagSet and TaggedCache from DI, which is how this latent architectural lifecycle vulnerability was discovered. Users must apply the decoupled configuration workaround outlined below. As a workaround, make sure that cache memory size does not generate early natural evictions from cache to free up space, deleting blacklisted jwt ids before they expire. Applications must decouple flat authentication vectors from the relational tagging subsystem. This forces token identifiers to write directly to the primary cache keyspace as flat, un-tagged key-value pairs where they securely retain their unclipped 14-day lifecycle.
CVE-2026-55250
“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.
This high-severity CVE scores 8.7 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.9% (58th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.
Also known asEUVD-2026-74284 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD
- High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.
The CVE record's description, written by its CNA (GitHub, Inc.), states the affected versions: "Maravel, a PHP framework oriented towards dependency injection, prior to version 10.74.0 has a high-severity Token Replay Vulnerability arising from a structural lifecycle mismatch between stateless token validation eng…" No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.
- CVSS v3
- 8.7
- EG Score
- 8.7HIGHmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 54EG Risk 54/100
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.
How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity87% × 45%Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.Exploitation0.9% × 40%FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.Automatability100% × 15%CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Check with the vendor for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high. - EPSS PROB
- 0.9%
- EPSS %ILE
- 58th
- KEV
- Not listed
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (8.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 8.7 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.9% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
No fix is confirmed yet. Check with the vendor for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
Published
September 8, 2026
Last Modified
September 10, 2026
Advisory Details (3)
Auto-updated Sep 8, 2026Home | Maravel Micro-Framework Docs
https://web.archive.org/web/20260316211934/https://macropay-solutions.github.io/maravel-docsHome · macropay-solutions/maravel Wiki · GitHub
https://web.archive.org/web/20250620110641/https://github.com/macropay-solutions/maravel/wikimacropay-solutions/maravel-framework - Packagist.org
https://web.archive.org/web/20260511235846/https://packagist.org/packages/macropay-solutions/maravel-frameworkWeakness Classification(3)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 45× in last 30d)
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.
- 2026-11-01 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-30 10:06 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-25 14:19 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-23 18:51 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-22 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-18 03:30 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-17 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-17 03:24 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-16 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 58th percentile
- 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
Show 67 moreShow fewer
- 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-12 15:55 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 19:39 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 16:54 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 14:17 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-11 10:28 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-09 20:24 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-09 00:23 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-08 08:45 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-06 21:51 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-05 22:50 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-04 00:28 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-03 00:24 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-02 01:27 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-10-01 02:29 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-09-30 02:12 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-29 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-09-29 08:22 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-28 20:53 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-09-27 21:55 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-09-26 22:50 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 57th percentile
- 2026-09-26 10:56 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-24 18:37 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.9% · 56th percentile
- 2026-09-23 19:39 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 45th percentile
- 2026-09-22 19:24 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-22 07:55 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-20 21:23 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-19 22:24 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-18 23:26 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-18 00:29 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-17 19:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-17 01:31 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-16 14:02 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-15 03:28 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-15 03:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-13 17:02 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-13 16:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-12 18:05 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-11 19:05 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-11 14:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-10 13:27 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-10 09:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 44th percentile
- 2026-09-09 14:29 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-09 13:50 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-08 23:20 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-08 22:20 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 8.7 HIGH
- 2026-09-08 22:18 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked
Related CVEs(same CWE)
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2026-55250?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-55250 published?
Is CVE-2026-55250 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-55250?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-55250?
Dependency Blast Radius
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-55250
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-55250?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.