Skip to main content
View

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A07:2025 - Authentication Failures
ASVS 5.0
V12 - Secure Communication Certificate validation
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Why: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9).
Patch available 0.0% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – May 26, 2026

Here is the multi-source synthesis for CVE-2026-42012:

json
{
  "product_name": "GnuTLS",
  "summary": "Improper certificate validation in GnuTLS (CWE-295) lets a remote attacker defeat TLS hostname verification by presenting a certificate that carries URI or SRV Subject Alternative Names, causing GnuTLS to incorrectly fall back to matching the connection's DNS hostname against the certificate's Common Name (CN) and enabling service spoofing or man-in-the-middle interception of sensitive data. The flaw was reported by Red Hat against GnuTLS as shipped in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 through 10, OpenShift Container Platform 4, and Red Hat Hardened Images, and carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 driven by high integrity impact. No public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and the issue is not listed in CISA KEV; exploitation requires the victim to initiate a connection to attacker-controlled infrastructure (UI:R).",
  "technical_context": "GnuTLS is a widely deployed open-source library implementing TLS/SSL and X.509 certificate handling, used by numerous applications and system components across the Red Hat ecosystem. During X.509 peer verification, RFC 6125 and modern practice require that a DNS hostname be matched against dNSName Subject Alternative Name (SAN) entries, and the deprecated CN-based matching should only occur when no relevant SAN is present. The root cause is classed as CWE-295 (Improper Certificate Validation): when a certificate presents only URI or SRV SAN entries (and no dNSName SAN), GnuTLS's logic incorrectly treats the absence of a *matching DNS* SAN as license to fall back to comparing the hostname against the CN, rather than failing the match. Because URI/SRV SANs are valid certificate fields that do not assert DNS identity, an attacker can populate them to suppress correct SAN-based matching while supplying an attacker-chosen CN, breaking the trust binding between the presented certificate and the requested hostname.",
  "risk_assessment": "The CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N, base 7.1) describes a network-reachable, low-complexity, unauthenticated flaw whose primary consequence is high integrity impact (spoofing/identity confusion) with only low confidentiality impact and no availability impact — consistent with a MITM/impersonation weakness rather than direct RCE. The UI:R element is significant: the victim client must initiate or be lured into a TLS connection that the attacker can intercept or answer, so this is not a fully autonomous remote exploit. No EPSS score was provided in the input, so exploitation probability cannot be quantified here; KEV status is not present (no active exploitation), and no POC was supplied, so there is no public exploit identified at time of analysis. Net assessment: a credible, real integrity risk for systems performing TLS hostname verification via GnuTLS — particularly in service-to-service and automated client contexts — but its practical severity is gated by the need for an attacker to be on-path or to redirect the victim, and by the application actually relying on GnuTLS hostname matching. Note one item to verify with the vendor: exact affected GnuTLS package versions are not enumerated in the provided data (only Red Hat product CPEs are given).",
  "affected_products": "The affected component is the GnuTLS library as distributed by Red Hat. Per the supplied CPE data, impacted products include Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 (cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_6 through _10), Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 (cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_openshift_container_platform_4), and Red Hat Hardened Images (cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_hardened_images). Specific fixed/affected GnuTLS package version ranges are not enumerated in the provided data and should be confirmed against the Red Hat advisory at https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-42012 and the tracking bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2467441. Because GnuTLS is an upstream library, non-Red-Hat distributions and applications that bundle or link GnuTLS may also be affected even though only Red Hat products are listed in this intelligence set.",
  "remediation": "No vendor-released patch version is identified at time of analysis — the supplied references are the Red Hat CVE page (https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-42012) and tracking bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2467441), neither of which carries an exact fixed package version in the provided data, so monitor those URLs and apply the updated gnutls packages via the standard distribution update mechanism (e.g. dnf/yum update gnutls and dependent libraries) as soon as Red Hat publishes errata. Until a fix is available, compensating controls include: configuring or modifying TLS clients to require a matching dNSName SAN and reject CN fallback entirely (many applications expose a strict-verification or no-CN-fallback option), which eliminates the bug's trigger but may break connections to legacy certificates that still rely on CN; pinning expected server certificates or CAs for high-value service-to-service connections so a swapped certificate is rejected regardless of SAN/CN logic, at the cost of higher operational overhead on certificate rotation; and restricting/segmenting network paths so untrusted parties cannot occupy a man-in-the-middle position for the affected TLS flows. Validate any application-level workaround in staging, since tightening hostname verification can surface previously tolerated certificate misconfigurations.",
  "exploit_scenario": "An attacker on the network path (e.g. via ARP/DNS spoofing or a malicious upstream) intercepts a victim application's outbound TLS connection and presents a certificate containing URI or SRV SANs but no matching dNSName SAN, with an attacker-controlled CN crafted to satisfy GnuTLS's fallback check. GnuTLS validates the certificate as matching the requested hostname, so the victim establishes a 'trusted' session with the attacker, who can then impersonate the legitimate service and read or manipulate the exchanged data. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, and the attack requires the victim to initiate the affected connection (UI:R).",
  "exploitation_conditions": "Exploitation requires that (1) the victim use an application that performs TLS hostname verification through the vulnerable GnuTLS, (2) the attacker be able to present a certificate to that client — i.e. occupy a man-in-the-middle/on-path position or redirect the victim to attacker-controlled infrastructure (the UI:R requirement: the victim must initiate or be induced to make the TLS connection), and (3) the malicious certificate contain URI or SRV Subject Alternative Names while lacking a correctly matching dNSName SAN, with an attacker-chosen Common Name, which is the exact configuration that triggers the faulty CN fallback. No authentication is required of the attacker (PR:N) and complexity is low (AC:L). Limiting factors that reduce real-world risk: the attack is not autonomous — it depends on victim-initiated connections and an on-path/redirection capability rather than a default-config, drive-by remote trigger; it only succeeds where the application relies on GnuTLS hostname matching (applications doing certificate pinning or enforcing strict SAN-only verification are not affected); and impact is confined to identity spoofing and interception (high integrity, low confidentiality) rather than code execution or denial of service.",
  "attack_chain": "Gain on-path/redirect position for victim TLS connection → Present crafted cert with URI/SRV SANs and attacker CN → GnuTLS falls back to CN match and accepts cert → Establish trusted TLS session as impersonated service → Intercept or manipulate sensitive data",
  "confidence_notes": "Vulnerability existence, CWE-295 classification, CVSS 7.1 vector, and affected Red Hat product set are confirmed by the Red Hat-sourced intelligence and CPE data; the spoofing/CN-fallback mechanism is taken directly from the CVE description. The attack-position and certificate prerequisites are INFERRED from the CVSS vector (UI:R, network MITM) and the description's SAN/CN wording, not from a published technical write-up. UNKNOWN/MISSING from the provided data: exact affected and fixed GnuTLS package versions, EPSS score, and any POC — KEV status is absent so there is no confirmed active exploitation; the linked Red Hat advisory and Bugzilla should be checked for the authoritative fixed-version errata."
}
Earlier versions of this analysis (1)
v1 May 26, 2026 - 22:13 CVSS 7.1

Improper certificate validation in GnuTLS (CWE-295) lets a remote attacker defeat TLS hostname verification by presenting a certificate that carries URI or SRV Subject Alternative Names, causing GnuTLS to incorrectly fall back to matching the connection's DNS hostname against the certificate's Common Name (CN) and enabling service spoofing or man-in-the-middle interception of sensitive data. The flaw was reported by Red Hat against GnuTLS as shipped in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 through 10, OpenShift Container Platform 4, and Red Hat Hardened Images, and carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 driven by high integrity impact. No public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and the issue is not listed in CISA KEV; exploitation requires the victim to initiate a connection to attacker-controlled infrastructure (UI:R).

Affects your stack

Find out whether the stacks and servers you run are on an affected version.

Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.

Know when Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 gets its next vulnerability

  • Watch products and get an email when something new is published
  • Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
  • Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources

No credit card · 7-day full trial

Severity by source

Vendor (redhat) PRIMARY 7.1 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
SUSE HIGH
Red Hat 7.1 MEDIUM

Primary rating from Vendor (redhat).

CVSS VectorVendor: redhat

Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
None
User Interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
High
Availability
None

DescriptionCVE.org

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.

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.0%
Top 91% exploitable
Data Quality
7 sources
Confidence: High
EUVD NVD CVE.org EPSS Vulnrichment MSRC Vendor VulDB

How this decision was reached

The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.

SignalValue
Severity HIGH
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.0%
Patch available Yes
Active threat No
Deciding rule
HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9)
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision· derived
Scheduled
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Open
Automatable
No
Human Impact· derived
Medium
Technical Impact
Partial

Priority Score

36
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +36
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

Attack Technique

Information disclosure occurs when an application unintentionally exposes sensitive data that aids attackers in reconnaissance or directly compromises security.

Affected Products (CPE)CVE.org

cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_10:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_6:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_7:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_8:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_enterprise_linux_9:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_hardened_images:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:red_hat:red_hat_openshift_container_platform_4:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
CVE-2026-18663 MEDIUM
5.9 Aug 12

Heap corruption via double-free in 389-ds-base's LDAP control parsing allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to crash

CVE-2026-4631 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Apr 07

Remote code execution in Cockpit's web interface allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands on the h

CVE-2026-4480 CRITICAL POC
9.0 May 26

Remote code execution in Samba's printing subsystem allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary shell commands via craft

CVE-2026-101258 HIGH POC
7.8 Oct 06

Ghostscript can execute arbitrary shell commands with the privileges of its process when it renders a crafted PostScript

CVE-2026-96889 HIGH POC
7.8 Sep 23

Use-after-free in librsvg during rendering of crafted SVG documents with nested XInclude directives and duplicate entity

CVE-2026-4775 HIGH POC
7.8 Mar 24

A signed integer overflow vulnerability exists in the libtiff library's putcontig8bitYCbCr44tile function that leads to

CVE-2026-114406 MEDIUM POC
6.8 Oct 21

The system CA trust store shipped in Red Hat's ca-certificates RPM packages includes eMudhra root authorities that signe

CVE-2026-18922 CRITICAL
9.8 Sep 07

Authentication bypass in 389 Directory Server (shipped as Red Hat Directory Server 11-13 and within RHEL 6-10) lets remo

CVE-2026-14544 CRITICAL
9.8 Jul 03

Remote code execution and privilege escalation in HPLIP (HP Linux Imaging and Printing) affects the hpcups print filter

CVE-2026-76578 CRITICAL
9.8 Sep 07

Unauthenticated privilege escalation in FreeIPA (Red Hat Identity Management) allows a remote attacker to gain genuine a

CVE-2026-102560 CRITICAL
9.8 Sep 29

A heap buffer overflow exists in libsoup's WebSocket permessage-deflate compression path: when a very large outbound mes

CVE-2026-5121 HIGH
7.5 Mar 30

Remote code execution in libarchive on 32-bit systems allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via spe

Vendor StatusVendor

SUSE

Severity: High
Product Status
Image SL-Micro-Azure Image SL-Micro-BYOS-Azure Image SL-Micro-BYOS-EC2 Image SL-Micro-BYOS-GCE Image SL-Micro-Base Image SL-Micro-Base-RT Image SL-Micro-Base-RT-SelfInstall Image SL-Micro-Base-RT-encrypted Image SL-Micro-Base-SelfInstall Image SL-Micro-Base-encrypted Image SL-Micro-Base-qcow Image SL-Micro-EC2 Image SLE-Micro Image SLE-Micro-Azure Image SLE-Micro-BYOS Image SLE-Micro-BYOS-Azure Image SLE-Micro-BYOS-EC2 Image SLE-Micro-BYOS-GCE Image SLE-Micro-EC2 Image SLE-Micro-GCE Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Proxy-BYOS-Azure Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Proxy-BYOS-EC2 Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Proxy-BYOS-GCE Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-Azure-llc Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-Azure-ltd Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-BYOS-Azure Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-BYOS-EC2 Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-BYOS-GCE Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-EC2-llc Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-EC2-ltd Affected
Image SLES-Azure-3P Image SLES-Azure-Basic Image SLES-Azure-Standard Image SLES-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-EC2 Image SLES-GCE Image SLES-GCE-3P Image SLES-Hardened-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-Hardened-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-Hardened-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-SAPCAL-Azure Image SLES-SAPCAL-EC2 Image SLES-SAPCAL-GCE Affected
Image SLES-SAP-Azure Image SLES-SAP-Azure-3P Image SLES-SAP-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-SAP-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-SAP-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-SAP-EC2 Image SLES-SAP-GCE Image SLES-SAP-GCE-3P Affected
SUSE Liberty Linux 8 Fixed
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7 SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP7 SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP7 SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP7 SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP7 Fixed

References

Advisories & patches
ADVISORY https://ubuntu.com/security/notices/USN-8539-1 ADVISORY https://vuldb.com/vuln/365835 ADVISORY https://www.suse.com/support/update/SUSE-SU-2026:2087/ ADVISORY https://www.suse.com/support/update/SUSE-SU-2026:2115/ ADVISORY https://www.suse.com/support/update/SUSE-SU-2026:21752/ ADVISORY https://www.suse.com/support/update/SUSE-SU-2026:21784/ ADVISORY https://www.suse.com/support/update/SUSE-SU-2026:21815/ REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:13274 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:20611 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:20612 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:20613 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:26319 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:26409 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:29197 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:30004 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:30849 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:30850 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:32962 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:33125 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:41921 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:43575 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:58981 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:72502 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:74674 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82304 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82322 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82347 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82354 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82372 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82857 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:82888 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:89197 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:89232 REF https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:89333 REF https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-42012 REF https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2467441 REF https://www.gnutls.org/security-new.html#GNUTLS-SA-2026-04-29-7

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy