GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration
ubuntu-cve-2026-69248
Vulnerability from osv_ubuntu
Published
2026-08-03 22:16
Modified
2026-09-10 19:31
Summary
Details

cryptography is a package designed to expose cryptographic primitives and recipes to Python developers. Prior to 49.0.0, if an intermediate constrained CA permits the DNS name foo.example.com, and the leaf certificate has a wildcard in its DNS SAN of .example.com, python-cryptography's verifier accepts which allows escaping outside of the permitted names. The core issue is in DNSConstraint::matches, where a wildcard pattern was treated as matching a more-specific permitted constraint even though .example.com can expand to sibling names such as bar.example.com outside foo.example.com. This allows acceptance of an invalid certificate chain. This issue is fixed in 49.0.0.


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "ecosystem_specific": {
        "binaries": [
          {
            "binary_name": "python3-cryptography",
            "binary_version": "46.0.5-1ubuntu2"
          }
        ]
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Ubuntu:26.04:LTS",
        "name": "python-cryptography",
        "purl": "pkg:deb/ubuntu/python-cryptography@46.0.5-1ubuntu2?arch=source\u0026distro=resolute"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ],
      "versions": [
        "43.0.0-1ubuntu1",
        "46.0.1-1ubuntu2",
        "46.0.5-1ubuntu1",
        "46.0.5-1ubuntu2"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "details": "cryptography is a package designed to expose cryptographic primitives and recipes to Python developers. Prior to 49.0.0, if an intermediate constrained CA permits the DNS name foo.example.com, and the leaf certificate has a wildcard in its DNS SAN of *.example.com, python-cryptography\u0027s verifier accepts which allows escaping outside of the permitted names. The core issue is in DNSConstraint::matches, where a wildcard pattern was treated as matching a more-specific permitted constraint even though *.example.com can expand to sibling names such as bar.example.com outside foo.example.com. This allows acceptance of an invalid certificate chain. This issue is fixed in 49.0.0.",
  "id": "UBUNTU-CVE-2026-69248",
  "modified": "2026-09-10T19:31:38Z",
  "published": "2026-08-03T22:16:00Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2026-69248"
    },
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-69248"
    },
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/security/advisories/GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c"
    },
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/pull/14888"
    },
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/commit/4d035a4225965edeffd312079a510ef25fcfdcb2"
    }
  ],
  "related": [],
  "schema_version": "1.7.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    },
    {
      "score": "medium",
      "type": "Ubuntu"
    }
  ],
  "upstream": [
    "CVE-2026-69248"
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…