找出代码中每一处签名的位置——以及其中的错误

$ npx ecdsa-scan .

src/auth/session.js
  6:18  confirmed  jwt-verify-missing-algorithms  JWT verified without an explicit algorithm allow-list
      │ const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey);
      `jwt.verify(token, publicKey)` does not pass `algorithms`, so the token header decides how the
      signature is checked.
      Why it matters: A JWT names its own algorithm in the header, so a verifier that does not pin
      the accepted algorithms lets the token choose how it is checked. The classic result is
      algorithm confusion: an attacker re-signs the token with HS256 using your RSA/EC public key as
      the HMAC secret, or supplies alg:none, and verification succeeds. Always pass the exact
      algorithms your issuer uses.
      Fix:
        jsonwebtoken:  jwt.verify(token, publicKey, { algorithms: ["ES256"] })
        jose:          await jwtVerify(token, key, { algorithms: ["ES256"] })
        PyJWT:         jwt.decode(token, key, algorithms=["ES256"])
        golang-jwt:    jwt.Parse(s, keyFunc, jwt.WithValidMethods([]string{"ES256"}))
      Reference: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8725#section-3.1

  11:29  confirmed  jwt-verify-missing-algorithms  JWT verified without an explicit algorithm allow-list
      │ const { payload } = await jwtVerify(token, key);
      `jwtVerify(token, key)` does not pass `algorithms`, so the token header decides how the
      signature is checked.

  17:10  confirmed  jwt-verify-missing-algorithms  JWT verified without an explicit algorithm allow-list
      │ return jwt.verify(token, key, { algorithms: [] });
      `jwt.verify` accepts an empty algorithm list or "none" — every token, including unsigned ones,
      will pass.


src/webhooks/verify.js
  6:3  suspected  unchecked-verification-result  Verification result is never checked
      │ crypto.verify(null, data, publicKey, signature);
      `crypto.verify(...)` returns a boolean that is discarded here, so a failed signature check
      changes nothing. Wrap it in a condition and reject on `false`.
      Why it matters: `crypto.verify`, `secp256k1.verify` and `ecdsa.Verify` report failure by
      returning `false`, not by throwing. Calling one as a bare statement means an invalid signature
      is indistinguishable from a valid one and execution simply continues — the check exists in the
      code but does nothing. The result must control a branch: an `if`, an early return, or a thrown
      error.
      Fix:
        // bad
        crypto.verify(null, data, publicKey, signature);
        
        // good
        if (!crypto.verify(null, data, publicKey, signature)) {
          throw new Error('invalid signature');
        }
      Reference: https://nodejs.org/api/crypto.html#cryptoverifyalgorithm-data-key-signature-callback

Inventory
  library: jose (1), jsonwebtoken (1), node:crypto (1)
  operation: verify (2)

Summary 2 files scanned, 4 findings (3 confirmed, 1 suspected)
Exit code 1: 3 confirmed findings.
Static pattern analysis: it can miss defects and can flag correct code. Treat advisory findings as questions, not verdicts.