Security Audit Report
Date: 2026-04-25T04:36:13.139Z
Vulnerabilities: 3
RUSTSEC-2026-0104: Reachable panic in certificate revocation list parsing
Package: rustls-webpki@0.103.10
Severity: Unknown
URL: null
A panic was reachable when parsing certificate revocation lists via [BorrowedCertRevocationList::from_der]
or [OwnedCertRevocationList::from_der]. This was the result of mishandling a syntactically valid empty
BIT STRING appearing in the onlySomeReasons element of a IssuingDistributionPoint CRL extension.
This panic is reachable prior to a CRL's signature being verified.
Applications that do not use CRLs are not affected.
Thank you to @tynus3 for the report.
Patched Versions: >=0.103.13, <0.104.0-alpha.1, >=0.104.0-alpha.7
RUSTSEC-2026-0098: Name constraints for URI names were incorrectly accepted
Package: rustls-webpki@0.103.10
Severity: Unknown
URL: null
Name constraints for URI names were ignored and therefore accepted.
Note this library does not provide an API for asserting URI names, and URI name constraints are otherwise not implemented. URI name constraints are now rejected unconditionally.
Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
This vulnerability is identified as GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5. Thank you to @1seal for the report.
Patched Versions: >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1, >=0.104.0-alpha.6
RUSTSEC-2026-0099: Name constraints were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name
Package: rustls-webpki@0.103.10
Severity: Unknown
URL: null
Permitted subtree name constraints for DNS names were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name.
This was incorrect because, given a name constraint of accept.example.com, *.example.com could feasibly allow a name of reject.example.com which is outside the constraint.
This is very similar to CVE-2025-61727.
Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
This vulnerability is identified as GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh. Thank you to @1seal for the report.
Patched Versions: >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1, >=0.104.0-alpha.6
This issue was automatically created by the security audit workflow.
Security Audit Report
Date: 2026-04-25T04:36:13.139Z
Vulnerabilities: 3
RUSTSEC-2026-0104: Reachable panic in certificate revocation list parsing
Package:
rustls-webpki@0.103.10Severity: Unknown
URL: null
A panic was reachable when parsing certificate revocation lists via [
BorrowedCertRevocationList::from_der]or [
OwnedCertRevocationList::from_der]. This was the result of mishandling a syntactically valid emptyBIT STRINGappearing in theonlySomeReasonselement of aIssuingDistributionPointCRL extension.This panic is reachable prior to a CRL's signature being verified.
Applications that do not use CRLs are not affected.
Thank you to @tynus3 for the report.
Patched Versions: >=0.103.13, <0.104.0-alpha.1, >=0.104.0-alpha.7
RUSTSEC-2026-0098: Name constraints for URI names were incorrectly accepted
Package:
rustls-webpki@0.103.10Severity: Unknown
URL: null
Name constraints for URI names were ignored and therefore accepted.
Note this library does not provide an API for asserting URI names, and URI name constraints are otherwise not implemented. URI name constraints are now rejected unconditionally.
Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
This vulnerability is identified as GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5. Thank you to @1seal for the report.
Patched Versions: >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1, >=0.104.0-alpha.6
RUSTSEC-2026-0099: Name constraints were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name
Package:
rustls-webpki@0.103.10Severity: Unknown
URL: null
Permitted subtree name constraints for DNS names were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name.
This was incorrect because, given a name constraint of
accept.example.com,*.example.comcould feasibly allow a name ofreject.example.comwhich is outside the constraint.This is very similar to CVE-2025-61727.
Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
This vulnerability is identified as GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh. Thank you to @1seal for the report.
Patched Versions: >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1, >=0.104.0-alpha.6
This issue was automatically created by the security audit workflow.