CVE Intelligence
Medium Cryptography

CVE-2026-89102 — Improper Certificate Validation in Wolfssl

In wolfSSL versions 5.7.2 through 5.9.2 there is a client-side implementation flaw in RFC 6961, multiple OCSP response stapling, which can lead to certificate forgery. When a wolfSSL client enables OCSP stapling with the HAVE_CERTIFICATE_STATUS_REQUEST_V2 feature and calls wolfSSL_UseOCSPStaplingV2(ssl, WOLFSSL_CSR2_OCSP_MULTI, options), the client accepts any certificate in the peer's chain as a certificate authority without verifying that the certificate is actually authorized to act as one. This means that an attacker who possesses any certificate that chains to a CA trusted by the client (along with its private key) can forge certificates for arbitrary identities that will be accepted as valid by the client. The end entity certificate of the server is stored in the persistent trust store, affecting subsequent connections that reuse the context even when OCSP multi usage is not employed. Found by internal wolfSSL testing.

Published Sep 27, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database · CNA: facts@wolfssl.com

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • Technical severity (medium)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
—
No EPSS score.
Affects
wolfSSL
Wolfssl
CVSS base
6.5
Medium · 2 source(s)

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (wolfSSL Wolfssl).
  2. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (cryptography), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
wolfSSL Wolfssl ≥ 5.7.2 and ≤ 5.9.2 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
8.3 CVSS 4.0 High — — facts@wolfssl.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.8 3.6 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Check TLS negotiations and unexpected certificates in the component’s traffic.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 6.5
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Sep 27, 2026 · facts@wolfssl.com

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

wolfSSL
every CVE for this vendor
Cryptography
same class
CWE-295
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Medium CVE-2026-94417 When an application enables both OCSP and CRL revocation checking on one WOLFSSL_CTX or… 18d
  • Critical CVE-2026-89134 Improper Certificate Validation in Wolfssl 18d
  • Medium CVE-2026-89135 Improper Certificate Validation in Wolfssl 18d
  • High CVE-2026-93302 Improper Certificate Validation in Wolfssl 18d
  • Low CVE-2026-93304 A (D)TLS 1.2 client can accept a ChangeCipherSpec message before it has sent its… 18d
  • Medium CVE-2026-89133 Improper Certificate Validation in Wolfssl 18d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No FIRST EPSS score.
  • No CISA SSVC assessment.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-89102 is "Improper Certificate Validation in Wolfssl", rated Medium. It affects Wolfssl (wolfSSL); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.5 describes technical severity. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.