Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #457 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 96.68% 96.68%
=======================================
Files 20 20
Lines 3896 3896
=======================================
Hits 3767 3767
Misses 129 129 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
djc
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2026
cpu
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2026
Merged
Member
Author
|
updated discussion of severity/impact to remove cvss |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Release notes:
Correct selection of candidate CRLs by Distribution Point and Issuing Distribution Point. If a certificate had more than one
distributionPoint, then only the firstdistributionPointwould be considered against each CRL'sIssuingDistributionPointdistributionPoint, and then the certificate's subsequentdistributionPoints would be ignored.The impact was that correct provided CRLs would not be consulted to check revocation. With
UnknownStatusPolicy::Deny(the default) this would lead to incorrect but safeError::UnknownRevocationStatus. WithUnknownStatusPolicy::Allowthis would lead to inappropriate acceptance of revoked certificates.This vulnerability is thought to be of limited impact. This is because both the certificate and CRL are signed -- an attacker would need to compromise a trusted issuing authority to trigger this bug. An attacker with such capabilities could likely bypass revocation checking through other more impactful means (such as publishing a valid, empty CRL.)
More likely, this bug would be latent in normal use, and an attacker could leverage faulty revocation checking to continue using a revoked credential.
This vulnerability is identified by GHSA-pwjx-qhcg-rvj4. Thank you to @1seal for the report.