CVE-2026-42012: Gnutls: gnutls: certificate validation bypass due to improper handling of uri and srv sans
A flaw was found in gnutls. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by presenting a specially crafted certificate that contains Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or Service (SRV) Subject Alternative Names (SANs). This could cause the certificate validation process to incorrectly fall back to checking DNS hostnames against the Common Name (CN), potentially allowing the attacker to spoof legitimate services or intercept sensitive information.
Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
GnuTLS may accept the wrong certificate identity when URI or SRV subject alternative names are present. A remote attacker could use a crafted certificate to impersonate a legitimate service or interfere with sensitive communications. The public bundle rates this high, but does not show confirmed active exploitation.
Executive priority
Treat as a high-priority patching and exposure review item for RHEL systems that initiate or validate TLS connections with GnuTLS. It can undermine service identity trust, enabling spoofing or interception scenarios, but supplied evidence does not indicate known active exploitation.
Technical view
This is a CWE-295 certificate validation bypass in GnuTLS. Crafted URI or SRV SAN entries can cause validation to fall back to DNS hostname comparison against the certificate Common Name. The supplied CVSS is 7.1: network, low complexity, no privileges, user interaction required, with low confidentiality and high integrity impact.
Likely exposure
Exposure is most likely on affected Red Hat Enterprise Linux systems running listed gnutls packages, and some RHEL 8 support streams listing libtasn1. Risk depends on whether applications use GnuTLS for TLS certificate identity checks involving URI or SRV SANs.
Exploitation context
The bundle describes a remote attacker presenting a specially crafted certificate. KEV is false, and no provided source states active exploitation. User interaction is reflected in the CVSS vector, so exploitation likely depends on a victim client or workflow accepting the attacker-presented certificate path.
Researcher notes
Key research focus is identity matching behavior when URI or SRV SANs coexist with Common Name fallback. The affected list is Red Hat-specific in the bundle; do not generalize to all GnuTLS distributions without vendor confirmation.
Mitigation direction
Apply relevant Red Hat security advisories for affected RHEL streams and packages.
Prioritize systems using GnuTLS for service-to-service or client TLS verification.
Review GnuTLS upstream guidance for any version-specific remediation details.
Inventory affected gnutls and listed libtasn1 package versions.
Monitor Red Hat and GnuTLS advisories for updated fixes or mitigations.
Validation and detection
Check installed gnutls package versions against the affected Red Hat versions.
Identify applications linked to or configured to use GnuTLS for TLS validation.
Confirm relevant Red Hat errata are installed on each affected RHEL stream.
Review certificate validation test coverage for URI and SRV SAN handling.
Verify no compensating controls rely only on certificate Common Name matching.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Potential ATT&CK relevance
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
cwe · low confidence lookup
CWE-295: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
The affected technology mentions containers, so container-specific ATT&CK technique review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
CWE-295 · source CWE mapping
Improper Certificate Validation
Improper Certificate Validation represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.