Total
1717 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-34073 | 1 Cryptography.io | 1 Cryptography | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| cryptography is a package designed to expose cryptographic primitives and recipes to Python developers. Prior to version 46.0.6, DNS name constraints were only validated against SANs within child certificates, and not the "peer name" presented during each validation. Consequently, cryptography would allow a peer named bar.example.com to validate against a wildcard leaf certificate for *.example.com, even if the leaf's parent certificate (or upwards) contained an excluded subtree constraint for bar.example.com. This issue has been patched in version 46.0.6. | |||||
| CVE-2022-27782 | 3 Debian, Haxx, Splunk | 3 Debian Linux, Curl, Universal Forwarder | 2026-10-14 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| libcurl would reuse a previously created connection even when a TLS or SSHrelated option had been changed that should have prohibited reuse.libcurl keeps previously used connections in a connection pool for subsequenttransfers to reuse if one of them matches the setup. However, several TLS andSSH settings were left out from the configuration match checks, making themmatch too easily. | |||||
| CVE-2025-40745 | 1 Siemens | 7 Simcenter 3d, Simcenter Femap, Simcenter Star-ccm\+ Viewer and 4 more | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 3.7 LOW |
| A vulnerability has been identified in Siemens Software Center (All versions < V3.5.8.2), Simcenter 3D (All versions < V2506.6000), Simcenter Femap (All versions < V2506.0002), Simcenter STAR-CCM+ (All versions < V2602), Solid Edge SE2025 (All versions < V225.0 Update 13), Solid Edge SE2026 (All versions < V226.0 Update 04), Tecnomatix Plant Simulation (All versions < V2504.0008). Affected applications do not properly validate client certificates to connect to Analytics Service endpoint. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to perform man in the middle attacks. | |||||
| CVE-2026-78020 | 1 Dell | 1 Policy Manager For Secure Connect Gateway | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Denial of service, Information disclosure, and Remote execution. | |||||
| CVE-2022-1343 | 2 Netapp, Openssl | 43 A250, A250 Firmware, A700s and 40 more | 2026-10-14 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| The function `OCSP_basic_verify` verifies the signer certificate on an OCSP response. In the case where the (non-default) flag OCSP_NOCHECKS is used then the response will be positive (meaning a successful verification) even in the case where the response signing certificate fails to verify. It is anticipated that most users of `OCSP_basic_verify` will not use the OCSP_NOCHECKS flag. In this case the `OCSP_basic_verify` function will return a negative value (indicating a fatal error) in the case of a certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. This issue also impacts the command line OpenSSL "ocsp" application. When verifying an ocsp response with the "-no_cert_checks" option the command line application will report that the verification is successful even though it has in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2). | |||||
| CVE-2026-78323 | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| A flaw was found in JSS (Java Security Services). The JSSTrustManager class does not verify NSS trust flags when validating CA certificates, allowing certificates present in the NSS database without TRUSTED_CA flags to be accepted as trust anchors for TLS connections. In non-default configurations where certificate revocation checking is disabled, this could allow a man-in-the-middle attacker to forge certificates accepted by PKI client connections. | |||||
| CVE-2021-28363 | 3 Fedoraproject, Oracle, Python | 3 Fedora, Peoplesoft Enterprise Peopletools, Urllib3 | 2026-10-14 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| The urllib3 library 1.26.x before 1.26.4 for Python omits SSL certificate validation in some cases involving HTTPS to HTTPS proxies. The initial connection to the HTTPS proxy (if an SSLContext isn't given via proxy_config) doesn't verify the hostname of the certificate. This means certificates for different servers that still validate properly with the default urllib3 SSLContext will be silently accepted. | |||||
| CVE-2021-22926 | 5 Haxx, Netapp, Oracle and 2 more | 26 Curl, Active Iq Unified Manager, Clustered Data Ontap and 23 more | 2026-10-14 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| libcurl-using applications can ask for a specific client certificate to be used in a transfer. This is done with the `CURLOPT_SSLCERT` option (`--cert` with the command line tool).When libcurl is built to use the macOS native TLS library Secure Transport, an application can ask for the client certificate by name or with a file name - using the same option. If the name exists as a file, it will be used instead of by name.If the appliction runs with a current working directory that is writable by other users (like `/tmp`), a malicious user can create a file name with the same name as the app wants to use by name, and thereby trick the application to use the file based cert instead of the one referred to by name making libcurl send the wrong client certificate in the TLS connection handshake. | |||||
| CVE-2020-8286 | 8 Apple, Debian, Fedoraproject and 5 more | 20 Mac Os X, Macos, Debian Linux and 17 more | 2026-10-14 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| curl 7.41.0 through 7.73.0 is vulnerable to an improper check for certificate revocation due to insufficient verification of the OCSP response. | |||||
| CVE-2026-54100 | 1 Redhat | 2 Openshift Container Platform, Windows Machine Config Operator | 2026-10-14 | N/A | 8.3 HIGH |
| A flaw was found in the Windows Machine Config Operator (WMCO) for Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform. WMCO establishes SSH connections to Windows worker nodes without verifying the remote server host key. An adjacent-network attacker who can intercept or redirect WMCO's SSH session can capture WICD and kubelet bootstrap credentials transferred during node configuration, enabling compromise of Windows node identities in the cluster. | |||||
| CVE-2026-97687 | 1 Python | 1 Urllib3 | 2026-10-13 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| urllib3 is an HTTP client library for Python. From 1.26.0 until 2.8.0, the proxy_ssl_context, proxy_assert_hostname, proxy_assert_fingerprint, ssl_context, cert_reqs, verify_mode, use_forwarding_for_https=True, and CERT_NONE configuration paths fail to remain separated because target-server TLS settings are incorrectly applied to the HTTPS proxy connection. The trigger is that an application uses an HTTPS proxy and configures target-server TLS settings that must remain separate from the proxy TLS handshake, including HTTPS forwarding with target-specific identity or credentials. Applying cert_reqs=CERT_NONE can overwrite proxy_ssl_context.verify_mode in place, and the mutation persists so later connections reusing the same context may connect to the HTTPS proxy without certificate verification. The attack mechanism is that an attacker intercepts and impersonates the HTTPS proxy after the effective proxy policy accepts the attacker's certificate. The impact is that the attacker can observe or modify forwarded traffic or receive a target TLS client certificate, while CONNECT tunneling still preserves the separate end-to-end target TLS connection. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.0. | |||||
| CVE-2026-63697 | 1 Dell | 1 System Update | 2026-10-13 | N/A | 7.6 HIGH |
| Dell System Update, versions prior to 2.3.0.0, contains an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Remote execution. | |||||
| CVE-2025-6032 | 2026-10-12 | N/A | 8.3 HIGH | ||
| A flaw was found in Podman. The podman machine init command fails to verify the TLS certificate when downloading the VM images from an OCI registry. This issue results in a Man In The Middle attack. | |||||
| CVE-2025-10548 | 2026-10-11 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM | ||
| The CleverControl employee monitoring software (v11.5.1041.6) fails to validate TLS server certificates during the installation process. The installer downloads and executes external components using curl.exe --insecure, enabling a man-in-the-middle attacker to deliver malicious files that are executed with SYSTEM privileges. This can lead to full remote code execution with administrative rights. No patch is available as the vendor has been unresponsive. It is assumed that previous versions are also affected, but this is not confirmed. | |||||
| CVE-2026-102671 | 2026-10-11 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM | ||
| The Joyland AI app accepts invalid SSL certificates in the invisible advertisement WebView by default. | |||||
| CVE-2026-107318 | 2026-10-09 | N/A | 7.4 HIGH | ||
| @fastify/reply-from is a Fastify plugin that forwards requests to an upstream HTTP or HTTPS server. In versions prior to 12.7.0, all of the built-in HTTPS transports override the secure default and set rejectUnauthorized to false, so the proxy does not verify the TLS certificate of the upstream even when the application points it at an https upstream in the default configuration. An on-path network attacker can therefore impersonate the configured HTTPS upstream, read the credentials and request bodies the proxy forwards, and return forged responses that the application trusts. The issue is fixed in @fastify/reply-from 12.7.0, and users should upgrade to 12.7.0 or later. As a workaround, pass an explicit rejectUnauthorized true on the transport, supply an already configured undici instance, or use the undici global agent. | |||||
| CVE-2025-61778 | 2026-10-09 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Akka.NET is a .NET port of the Akka project from the Scala / Java community. In all versions of Akka.Remote from v1.2.0 to v1.5.51, TLS could be enabled via our `akka.remote.dot-netty.tcp` transport and this would correctly enforce private key validation on the server-side of inbound connections. Akka.Remote, however, never asked the outbound-connecting client to present ITS certificate - therefore it's possible for untrusted parties to connect to a private key'd Akka.NET cluster and begin communicating with it without any certificate. The issue here is that for certificate-based authentication to work properly, ensuring that all members of the Akka.Remote network are secured with the same private key, Akka.Remote needed to implement mutual TLS. This was not the case before Akka.NET v1.5.52. Those who run Akka.NET inside a private network that they fully control or who were never using TLS in the first place are now affected by the bug. However, those who use TLS to secure their networks must upgrade to Akka.NET V1.5.52 or later. One patch forces "fail fast" semantics if TLS is enabled but the private key is missing or invalid. Previous versions would only check that once connection attempts occurred. The second patch, a critical fix, enforces mutual TLS (mTLS) by default, so both parties must be keyed using the same certificate. As a workaround, avoid exposing the application publicly to avoid the vulnerability having a practical impact on one's application. However, upgrading to version 1.5.52 is still recommended by the maintainers. | |||||
| CVE-2021-44533 | 3 Debian, Nodejs, Oracle | 9 Debian Linux, Node.js, Graalvm and 6 more | 2026-10-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name that would be interpreted as a multi-value Relative Distinguished Name, for example, in order to inject a Common Name that would allow bypassing the certificate subject verification.Affected versions of Node.js that do not accept multi-value Relative Distinguished Names and are thus not vulnerable to such attacks themselves. However, third-party code that uses node's ambiguous presentation of certificate subjects may be vulnerable. | |||||
| CVE-2026-95208 | 2026-10-08 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH | ||
| An issue in the ConfirmNameConstraints() function (wolfcrypt/src/asn.c) of wolfSSL v5.9.1 and v5.9.2 allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via providing crafted Certificate Authority certificates, leading to valid certificates without SAN to be incorrectly rejected by wolfSSL-based TLS clients. | |||||
| CVE-2021-3450 | 10 Fedoraproject, Freebsd, Mcafee and 7 more | 35 Fedora, Freebsd, Web Gateway and 32 more | 2026-10-08 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 7.4 HIGH |
| The X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT flag enables additional security checks of the certificates present in a certificate chain. It is not set by default. Starting from OpenSSL version 1.1.1h a check to disallow certificates in the chain that have explicitly encoded elliptic curve parameters was added as an additional strict check. An error in the implementation of this check meant that the result of a previous check to confirm that certificates in the chain are valid CA certificates was overwritten. This effectively bypasses the check that non-CA certificates must not be able to issue other certificates. If a "purpose" has been configured then there is a subsequent opportunity for checks that the certificate is a valid CA. All of the named "purpose" values implemented in libcrypto perform this check. Therefore, where a purpose is set the certificate chain will still be rejected even when the strict flag has been used. A purpose is set by default in libssl client and server certificate verification routines, but it can be overridden or removed by an application. In order to be affected, an application must explicitly set the X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT verification flag and either not set a purpose for the certificate verification or, in the case of TLS client or server applications, override the default purpose. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1h and newer are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1k. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not impacted by this issue. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1k (Affected 1.1.1h-1.1.1j). | |||||