-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 478
feat(functions): add hybrid JWT verification to TS edge runtime #5560
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
avallete
wants to merge
9
commits into
develop
Choose a base branch
from
claude/edge-runtime-jwt-asymmetric-lj8cqb
base: develop
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+453
−25
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fc5d8d9
feat(functions): add hybrid JWT verification to TS edge runtime
claude b7fdcbd
test(functions): cover hybrid JWT verification through the edge runtime
claude 8d9a640
fix(functions): resolve jose typing and asymmetric JWKS fallback
claude 3ab48f1
fix(functions): load jose via injected static import for edge runtime
claude f66460e
fix(functions): verify JWTs with WebCrypto instead of jose
claude c83bda6
fix(functions): validate JWT claims and harden JWKS handling
claude 80e5620
fix(functions): bound JWKS cache with TTL and harden claim parsing
claude a211129
fix(functions): reject array JWT payloads in claim validation
claude d239180
refactor(functions): drop dead local-JWKS branch, document SUPABASE_J…
claude File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For projects that configure asymmetric auth inputs such as
auth.signing_keys_pathorauth.third_party(both are loaded by@supabase/config), this writes a JWKS derived only from the legacyjwtSecret. As a result, ES256/RS256 tokens signed by the configured local signing key or third-party provider are absent fromSUPABASE_JWKS; the fallback only asks the local GoTrue JWKS endpoint, not the configured provider/file, so Edge Functions reject tokens that the hybrid verifier is meant to support. Resolve the JWKS from the loaded project auth config rather than always callinggenerateJwks(stackConfig.jwtSecret).Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Leaving this one open as a known limitation rather than fixing it in this PR, because the local stack doesn't yet support asymmetric signing locally:
StackBuilderpassesversion,port,siteUrl,jwtExpiry, andexternalUrlto the auth service, but notauth.signing_keys_pathorauth.third_party. So local GoTrue mints HS256 tokens signed withjwtSecret, andgenerateJwks(stackConfig.jwtSecret)is the correct local key set for them.signing_keys_path/third_partykeys intoSUPABASE_JWKSwouldn't match any locally-minted token today./auth/v1/.well-known/jwks.jsonfallback for keys the local auth service is aware of.Properly sourcing
SUPABASE_JWKSfrom the configured signing keys / third-party providers requires first plumbing those into the local auth service so it actually signs with them — that's a larger, separate change. Happy to file a follow-up issue if you'd like to track it.Generated by Claude Code