| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| In epa4all, prior to version 2026-05-20, an attacker who can intercept the TLS connection between epa4all and the ePA backend can complete the VAU handshake with attacker-controlled keys and obtain the session encryption keys. All inner HTTP traffic (patient consent decisions, medication data, document operations, authorization tokens, and entitlement queries) becomes readable and modifiable. The attacker can also inject arbitrary requests through the hijacked channel. This issue has been patched in version 2026-05-20. |
| A improper certificate validation vulnerability in Fortinet FortiClientEMS 7.4.3 through 7.4.5, FortiClientEMS 7.4.0 through 7.4.1, FortiClientEMS 7.2 all versions may allow attacker to information disclosure via <insert attack vector here> |
| Netty is a network application framework for development of protocol servers and clients. In versions 4.2.0.Final through 4.2.15.Final and prior to 4.1.135.Final, `OcspClient` does not validate that the `CertificateID` in an OCSP response matches the requested `CertificateID`, which can lead to replay attack. `OcspClient.validateResponse` accepts a legitimately signed `GOOD` status response for an unrelated certificate issued by the same CA, allowing bypass of revocation checks for another certificate. This issue is fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final. |
| Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in Erlang OTP public_key (pubkey_cert and public_key modules) allows a DNS nameConstraints bypass via subject CommonName fallback in TLS hostname verification.
Two flaws combine to allow a subordinate CA whose DNS nameConstraints are restricted (e.g. permitted;DNS:allowed.example.com) to issue a leaf certificate that an OTP TLS client accepts as a valid identity for an out-of-scope hostname (e.g. victim.example.com):
First, pubkey_cert:validate_names/6 in lib/public_key/src/pubkey_cert.erl only checks SAN DNS entries against nameConstraints. Per RFC 5280, a permitted DNS subtree only restricts certificates that contain a DNS-typed name. A leaf with no subjectAltName therefore trivially satisfies any permitted;DNS:... constraint regardless of its subject commonName.
Second, public_key:pkix_verify_hostname/3 in lib/public_key/src/public_key.erl falls back to the subject commonName when no subjectAltName is present, extracting id-at-commonName attributes as presented IDs and matching them against the reference hostname. The strict pkix_verify_hostname_match_fun(https) matcher does not suppress this fallback.
The result is that path validation accepts a CN-only leaf under a DNS-constrained intermediate (no SAN means the nameConstraints are not triggered), and hostname verification then accepts it via the CN fallback. The bypass is reachable from stock ssl:connect with verify_peer, a trusted CA, SNI, and the canonical strict https hostname matcher.
This issue affects OTP from OTP 19.3 before OTP 29.0.1, OTP 28.5.0.1, OTP 27.3.4.12 and OTP 26.2.5.21, corresponding to public_key from 1.4 before 1.21.1, 1.20.3.1, 1.17.1.3 and 1.15.1.7. |
| Improper Following of a Certificate's Chain of Trust vulnerability in Erlang OTP public_key (pubkey_cert module) allows a non-CA certificate to be accepted as an intermediate issuer, enabling certificate chain forgery.
In lib/public_key/src/pubkey_cert.erl, pubkey_cert:validate_extensions/7 contains two flaws that together allow a certificate with basicConstraints cA:false and no keyUsage extension to be used as an intermediate issuer in a chain passed to public_key:pkix_path_validation/3: the cA:false clause recurses into the remaining extensions without rejecting the certificate when it is in issuer position, and the keyUsage check only fires when the extension is present, so a certificate lacking keyUsage entirely bypasses the keyCertSign enforcement.
Any party holding an end-entity certificate with basicConstraints cA:false and no keyUsage extension, issued by any CA in the victim's trust store, can use that certificate's private key to sign forged leaf certificates for arbitrary identities. public_key:pkix_path_validation/3 accepts the resulting chain, and by extension every TLS or mTLS endpoint built on the OTP ssl application that relies on the default verifier is affected, including server identity verification on the client side and client certificate verification on mTLS servers.
This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 29.0.1, OTP 28.5.0.1, OTP 27.3.4.12 and OTP 26.2.5.21, corresponding to public_key from 0.22 before 1.21.1, 1.20.3.1, 1.17.1.3 and 1.15.1.7. |
| Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in Erlang OTP public_key (pubkey_ocsp module) allows OCSP designated-responder authorization bypass via missing signature verification.
The OCSP response validation in public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 does not verify that a CA-designated responder certificate was cryptographically signed by the issuing CA. Instead, it only checks that the responder certificate's issuer name matches the CA's subject name and that the certificate has the OCSPSigning extended key usage. An attacker who can intercept or control OCSP responses can create a self-signed certificate with a matching issuer name and the OCSPSigning EKU, and use it to forge OCSP responses that mark revoked certificates as valid.
This affects SSL/TLS clients using OCSP stapling, which may accept connections to servers with revoked certificates, potentially transmitting sensitive data to compromised servers. Applications using the public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 API directly are also affected, with impact depending on usage context.
This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/public_key/src/pubkey_ocsp.erl and program routines pubkey_ocsp:is_authorized_responder/3.
This issue affects OTP from OTP 27.0 before OTP 28.4.2 and OTP 27.3.4.10, corresponding to public_key from 1.16 before 1.20.3 and 1.17.1.2, and ssl from 11.2 before 11.5.4 and 11.2.12.7. |
| Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in Erlang OTP public_key (pubkey_ocsp module) allows forged OCSP responses signed with an expired responder certificate to be accepted as valid.
OCSP response verification in pubkey_ocsp:verify_response/5 and pubkey_ocsp:is_authorized_responder/3 in lib/public_key/src/pubkey_ocsp.erl does not check the validity period (notBefore/notAfter) of the OCSP responder certificate. An attacker who has obtained the private key of an expired CA-designated OCSP responder certificate can forge OCSP responses that Erlang/OTP accepts as valid.
This affects TLS clients using OCSP stapling via the ssl application: a malicious or compromised server can present a revoked TLS certificate together with a forged OCSP response signed by an expired responder key, and the client will accept the revoked certificate as valid. It also affects applications calling public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 directly, where the impact depends on the use case — server-side client certificate validation using this API may allow authentication bypass with a revoked client certificate.
This issue affects OTP from OTP 27.0 before OTP 29.0.1, OTP 28.5.0.1 and OTP 27.3.4.12, corresponding to public_key from 1.16 before 1.21.1, 1.20.3.1 and 1.17.1.3. |
| Dancer::Plugin::Auth::Google versions through 0.07 for Perl have TLS verification disabled.
The default user agent is initialised with SSL_verify_mode explicitly disabled.
An attacker with network man-in-the-middle (MITM) capability between the Dancer application and googleapis.com can intercept the OAuth2 token exchange and userinfo fetch, return a forged access_token and user profile, and be logged in to the Dancer application as any Google user. |
| Vulnerability in the Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition product of Oracle Java SE (component: Security). Supported versions that are affected are Oracle Java SE: 8u491, 8u491-perf, 11.0.31, 17.0.19, 21.0.11, 25.0.3, 26.0.1; Oracle GraalVM for JDK: 17.0.19 and 21.0.11; Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition: 21.3.18. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle Java SE, Oracle GraalVM for JDK, Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition accessible data. Note: This vulnerability can be exploited by using APIs in the specified Component, e.g., through a web service which supplies data to the APIs. This vulnerability also applies to Java deployments, typically in clients running sandboxed Java Web Start applications or sandboxed Java applets, that load and run untrusted code (e.g., code that comes from the internet) and rely on the Java sandbox for security. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 6.5 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N). |
| Vulnerability in Oracle Java SE (component: JSSE). Supported versions that are affected are Oracle Java SE: 8u491, 8u491-perf, 11.0.31, 17.0.19, 21.0.11, 25.0.3, 26.0.1; Oracle GraalVM for JDK: 17.0.19 and 21.0.11; Oracle GraalVM Enterprise Edition: 21.3.18. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via TLS to compromise Oracle Java SE. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized creation, deletion or modification access to critical data or all Oracle Java SE accessible data. Note: This vulnerability can only be exploited by supplying data to APIs in the specified Component without using Untrusted Java Web Start applications or Untrusted Java applets, such as through a web service. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 5.9 (Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N). |
| RRSIGs with too few labels can lead to bypass of DNSSEC wildcard validation |
| For untrusted certificates that contain the "Authority Information Access - caIssuers URI" extension, Szafir SDK will automatically download the parent CA certificate from the specified URL and will import it to its trust store as a "nonqualified" certificate. In such a case, Szafir SDK returns a success status code of 0 ("Positively verified") upon successful cryptographic verification and a certificate status of "nonqualified".
For other types of untrusted certificates, Szafir SDK returns a success status code of 0 ("Positively verified") upon successful cryptographic verification and a certificate status of "nondetermined".
This may lead integrating applications to incorrectly treat the digital signature as valid despite an untrusted certificate chain. This flaw enables authentication bypass and user impersonation:
(1) in use-cases other than qualified certificate authentication, or
(2) if the qualified certificate authentication use-case is not correctly implemented by the integrating application.
This issue was fixed in version 1.8.463.2. |
| A flaw was found in gnutls. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by presenting a specially crafted certificate that contains Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or Service (SRV) Subject Alternative Names (SANs). This could cause the certificate validation process to incorrectly fall back to checking DNS hostnames against the Common Name (CN), potentially allowing the attacker to spoof legitimate services or intercept sensitive information. |
| A flaw was found in gnutls. When validating certificates, an oversized Subject Alternative Name (SAN) could cause the validation process to incorrectly fall back to checking the Common Name (CN) field. This could allow a remote attacker to bypass proper certificate validation, potentially leading to spoofing or man-in-the-middle attacks. |
| A flaw was found in gnutls. This vulnerability occurs because permitted name constraints were incorrectly ignored when previous Certificate Authorities (CAs) only had excluded name constraints. A remote attacker could exploit this to bypass critical name constraint checks during certificate validation. This bypass could lead to the acceptance of invalid certificates, potentially enabling spoofing or man-in-the-middle attacks against affected systems. |
| lettre is a a mailer library for Rust. Starting in version 0.10.1 and prior to version 0.11.22, an inverted-boolean bug in lettre's `boring-tls` integration silently disables TLS hostname verification for callers using the default (strict) configuration. An on-path attacker presenting any chain-valid certificate for any domain can intercept SMTP submission, including PLAIN/LOGIN credentials and message contents, against any lettre user built with the `boring-tls` feature. Other TLS backends (`native-tls`, `rustls`) are unaffected. Version 0.11.22 patches the issue. |
| Dulwich through 1.1.0 was found to be missing SSH host key verification in contrib/paramiko_vendor.py. |
| Improper TLS hostname verification in Snowflake Connector for Python versions prior to 4.7.1 and 3.18.1 may have allowed a network-positioned attacker to bypass certificate hostname validation on HTTPS connections made by the connector. An attacker with on-path network access could exploit this by intercepting or redirecting network traffic and presenting a certificate signed by any trusted CA for any domain, causing the connector to accept connections without validating that the certificate matched the requested hostname. Successful exploitation requires an on-path traffic interception capability (e.g. ARP/DNS poisoning, rogue access point, BGP hijacking, or malicious proxy/exit node). This vulnerability may have exposed credentials, query data, and staged file contents to interception and tampering, and may have enabled the attacker to issue arbitrary SQL within the context of the victim's connector session. Impact is limited by the privileges of the affected Snowflake role. The fix is available in Snowflake Connector for Python versions 4.7.1 and 3.18.1. Users must manually upgrade. |
| A flaw was found in Contour. When an HTTPProxy is configured with both a fallback certificate and JWT (JSON Web Token) providers, Contour does not properly enforce JWT verification. This allows remote attackers to bypass security checks by sending requests without a valid token, specifically when clients do not provide a TLS Server Name Indication (SNI) or provide an unrecognized SNI. The consequence is unauthorized access to upstream services and potential information disclosure. |
| Improper certificate validation in Windows Cryptographic Services allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network. |
