authentication-failures
Skill20 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Detects weak password storage, flawed JWT validation, sessions surviving
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- scholarly360/owasp-top10-web-skillstheir own version, first seen Apr 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- scholarly360/owasp-top10-web-skills★ 23same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository52 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- broken-access-controlSkill
- concurrency-correctnessSkill
- contract-reviewSkill
- cryptographic-failuresSkill
- crypto-library-misuseSkill
- csrfSkill
- exceptional-conditionsSkill
- excessive-agencySkill
- file-uploadSkill
- graphql-securitySkill
- hardcoded-secretsSkill
- header-injectionSkill
- hotspotsSkill
- injectionSkill
- insecure-designSkill
- insecure-local-storageSkill
- insecure-output-handlingSkill
- insecure-plugin-designSkill
- integrity-failuresSkill
- ipc-securitySkill
- llm-supply-chainSkill
- logging-failuresSkill
- mass-assignmentSkill
- mcp-securitySkill
- memory-api-misuseSkill
- model-dosSkill
- model-theftSkill
- multi-agent-trustSkill
- nosql-injectionSkill
- numeric-trust-boundarySkill
- oauth-implementationSkill
- open-redirectSkill
- overrelianceSkill
- path-traversalSkill
- privilege-handlingSkill
- prompt-injectionSkill
- prototype-pollutionSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- race-conditionSkill
- rag-securitySkill
- redosSkill
- security-cleanupSkill
- security-misconfigurationSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- sensitive-disclosureSkill
- ssrfSkill
- supply-chainSkill
- threat-modelSkill
- token-smugglingSkill
- training-data-poisoningSkill
- unsafe-api-consumptionSkill
The file
Files
Authentication Failures Security Check (A07:2025)
What this checks
Protects identity and session integrity. Weak password storage, flawed JWT handling, and sessions that survive logout let attackers impersonate users, escalate privileges, and persist after credential rotation.
Vulnerable patterns
- JWT verification call with a weak, short, or hardcoded signing secret
- JWT decode that disables signature verification or accepts the
nonealgorithm - Logout handler that does not invalidate the session or token server-side
- Login flow with no rate limiting or account lockout, allowing credential stuffing
- Password or API-key comparison using a non-constant-time equality operator
For password hashing issues (MD5/SHA), see cryptographic-failures.
For hardcoded API keys/passwords in source, see hardcoded-secrets.
Fix immediately
Flag the vulnerable code and explain the risk. Then suggest a fix that establishes these properties:
- Signing keys come from outside the source tree — environment variable, secret manager, or KMS. Enforce a minimum length or entropy check at load time so a misconfigured deploy fails loudly rather than silently using a tiny secret.
- JWT verification pins the accepted algorithm(s) to an explicit allowlist
that rejects
noneand rejects algorithm switching between symmetric and asymmetric families (the classic HS256-vs-RS256 public-key-as-HMAC attack). The check must be algorithm-specific, however the library expresses it. - Logout invalidates credentials server-side. Either delete a server session record, add the token to a revocation list, or rotate a per-user signing key. Short token expiry alone does not satisfy this — a stolen token works until it expires. The code must demonstrate an active revocation mechanism.
- Password and API-key comparisons are constant-time — use the language's documented constant-time comparison primitive, never a plain equality operator.
- Login has a rate limit or lockout. Credential stuffing is cheap; unbounded guess rates make every leaked password list a working brute-force dictionary.
Translate these principles to the audited file's language and framework. Use the documented authentication and crypto APIs for that stack; do not roll your own.
Verification
Confirm these properties hold (language-agnostic):
- JWT signing/verification keys are sourced from outside the source tree (environment variable, secret manager, KMS) AND the code enforces a minimum length/entropy check at load time — a comment asserting "must be ≥32 bytes" without a runtime check does not satisfy this
- JWT verification pins the accepted algorithm(s) to an explicit allowlist that rejects
noneand rejects algorithm switching between symmetric and asymmetric families — whether expressed as aalgorithms=[...]parameter, a.withAlgorithm(...)builder call, aValidation::new(Algorithm::HS256)constructor, or equivalent - A logout / session termination path exists that invalidates credentials server-side — either by deleting a server session record, adding the token to a revocation list (DB, Redis, in-memory set), or rotating a per-user signing key. Short token expiry alone does not satisfy this; the code must demonstrate an active revocation mechanism
References
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

