https://vulnerability.circl.lu Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:43:29 +0000 https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-94417 <p>When an application enables both OCSP and CRL revocation checking on one WOLFSSL_CTX or certificate manager, wolfSSL skips the CRL check for any peer certificate that carries no Authority Information Access OCSP URL, and accepts a certificate the loaded CRL lists as revoked. The soft-fail policy for a missing responder collapses the OCSP result onto success before the code decides whether the CRL fallback is still needed, so &#34;no responder exists&#34; becomes indistinguishable from &#34;the responder answered good&#34;. Affected builds define both HAVE_OCSP and HAVE_CRL: --enable-ocsp --enable-crl directly, and implicitly --enable-all, --enable-distro, --enable-curl, --enable-nginx, --enable-haproxy, --enable-stunnel, --enable-lighty, --enable-wpas, --enable-strongswan, --enable-mosquitto, --enable-jni, --enable-openvpn and --enable-krb. An application is affected only if it calls both wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSP() (or wolfSSL_EnableOCSP() / wolfSSL_CertManagerEnableOCSP()) and wolfSSL_CTX_EnableCRL() (or the equivalents) with a CRL loaded; an application that uses OCSP stapling alone through wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSPStapling() is not affected, because that sets up a separate OCSP instance. The defect sits in ProcessPeerCerts() and is reachable over TLS 1.0 through TLS 1.3 and DTLS, both on a client verifying a server certificate and on a server verifying a client certificate under mutual or post-handshake authentication. When the skipped check falls on a chain certificate rather than the leaf,…</p> <p>When an application enables both OCSP and CRL revocation checking on one WOLFSSL_CTX or certificate manager, wolfSSL skips the CRL check for any peer certificate that carries no Authority Information Access OCSP URL, and accepts a certificate the loaded CRL lists as revoked. The soft-fail policy for a missing responder collapses the OCSP result onto success before the code decides whether the CRL fallback is still needed, so &#34;no responder exists&#34; becomes indistinguishable from &#34;the responder answered good&#34;. Affected builds define both HAVE_OCSP and HAVE_CRL: --enable-ocsp --enable-crl directly, and implicitly --enable-all, --enable-distro, --enable-curl, --enable-nginx, --enable-haproxy, --enable-stunnel, --enable-lighty, --enable-wpas, --enable-strongswan, --enable-mosquitto, --enable-jni, --enable-openvpn and --enable-krb. An application is affected only if it calls both wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSP() (or wolfSSL_EnableOCSP() / wolfSSL_CertManagerEnableOCSP()) and wolfSSL_CTX_EnableCRL() (or the equivalents) with a CRL loaded; an application that uses OCSP stapling alone through wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSPStapling() is not affected, because that sets up a separate OCSP instance. The defect sits in ProcessPeerCerts() and is reachable over TLS 1.0 through TLS 1.3 and DTLS, both on a client verifying a server certificate and on a server verifying a client certificate under mutual or post-handshake authentication. When the skipped check falls on a chain certificate rather than the leaf,…</p> https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-94417 https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/ghsa-vqr9-9vw2-33w6 <p>When an application enables both OCSP and CRL revocation checking on one WOLFSSL_CTX or certificate manager, wolfSSL skips the CRL check for any peer certificate that carries no Authority Information Access OCSP URL, and accepts a certificate the loaded CRL lists as revoked. The soft-fail policy for a missing responder collapses the OCSP result onto success before the code decides whether the CRL fallback is still needed, so &#34;no responder exists&#34; becomes indistinguishable from &#34;the responder answered good&#34;. Affected builds define both HAVE_OCSP and HAVE_CRL: --enable-ocsp --enable-crl directly, and implicitly --enable-all, --enable-distro, --enable-curl, --enable-nginx, --enable-haproxy, --enable-stunnel, --enable-lighty, --enable-wpas, --enable-strongswan, --enable-mosquitto, --enable-jni, --enable-openvpn and --enable-krb. An application is affected only if it calls both wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSP() (or wolfSSL_EnableOCSP() / wolfSSL_CertManagerEnableOCSP()) and wolfSSL_CTX_EnableCRL() (or the equivalents) with a CRL loaded; an application that uses OCSP stapling alone through wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSPStapling() is not affected, because that sets up a separate OCSP instance. The defect sits in ProcessPeerCerts() and is reachable over TLS 1.0 through TLS 1.3 and DTLS, both on a client verifying a server certificate and on a server verifying a client certificate under mutual or post-handshake authentication. When the skipped check falls on a chain certificate rather than the leaf,…</p> <p>When an application enables both OCSP and CRL revocation checking on one WOLFSSL_CTX or certificate manager, wolfSSL skips the CRL check for any peer certificate that carries no Authority Information Access OCSP URL, and accepts a certificate the loaded CRL lists as revoked. The soft-fail policy for a missing responder collapses the OCSP result onto success before the code decides whether the CRL fallback is still needed, so &#34;no responder exists&#34; becomes indistinguishable from &#34;the responder answered good&#34;. Affected builds define both HAVE_OCSP and HAVE_CRL: --enable-ocsp --enable-crl directly, and implicitly --enable-all, --enable-distro, --enable-curl, --enable-nginx, --enable-haproxy, --enable-stunnel, --enable-lighty, --enable-wpas, --enable-strongswan, --enable-mosquitto, --enable-jni, --enable-openvpn and --enable-krb. An application is affected only if it calls both wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSP() (or wolfSSL_EnableOCSP() / wolfSSL_CertManagerEnableOCSP()) and wolfSSL_CTX_EnableCRL() (or the equivalents) with a CRL loaded; an application that uses OCSP stapling alone through wolfSSL_CTX_EnableOCSPStapling() is not affected, because that sets up a separate OCSP instance. The defect sits in ProcessPeerCerts() and is reachable over TLS 1.0 through TLS 1.3 and DTLS, both on a client verifying a server certificate and on a server verifying a client certificate under mutual or post-handshake authentication. When the skipped check falls on a chain certificate rather than the leaf,…</p> https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/ghsa-vqr9-9vw2-33w6