CVE 8.7 HIGH

X.509 trust-chain bypass in wolfSSL_X509_verify_cert() via untrusted intermediate anchoring_CVE-2026-11310

8.7 / 10
HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Description

X.509 trust-chain bypass in the OpenSSL compatibility certificate verifier (wolfSSL_X509_verify_cert()). This affects only builds with --enable-opensslextra (OPENSSL_EXTRA) and whose application validates certificates by calling X509_verify_cert() with caller-supplied untrusted intermediate certificates; for those users it is critical, otherwise the library is unaffected. In particular, native wolfSSL TLS/DTLS usage is not impacted. wolfSSL's X509_verify_cert() temporarily loads each caller-supplied untrusted intermediate into the certificate manager but failed to drop them before the trusted-store check, so an untrusted intermediate could anchor the path itself. An attacker can present a chain that never reaches a configured trust anchor and have it accepted, resulting in acceptance of an attacker-controlled certificate. This is certificate verification independent of TLS (e.g. S/MIME/CMS, code/firmware signing, JWT/JWS x5c), is not specific to any key type or algorithm, and a single untrusted intermediate suffices. The default wolfSSL TLS handshake (WOLFSSL_VERIFY_PEER) is not affected; only TLS applications doing manual or deferred peer verification through this API are, which also requires --enable-sessioncerts.

AI Analysis

X.509 trust-chain bypass vulnerability in wolfSSL_X509_verify_cert() function, allowing an attacker to present a chain that never reaches a configured trust anchor and have it accepted, resulting in acceptance of an attacker-controlled certificate.

Basic Information

ID CVE-2026-11310
Source wolfSSL
Published Jun 25, 2026 at 19:38

Affected Product

Vendor wolfSSL
Product wolfSSL
Version 5.8.4
Affected Versions wolfSSL wolfSSL 5.8.4

CWE Classification

AI Assessment

AI Score 8.7 / 10
AI Severity High
Vendor wolfSSL
Product wolfSSL
Version 5.8.4

References

💭 Join the Security Discussion

🔒 Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

⚠️ Please be respectful and constructive in your comments. Security discussions should remain professional.