Go, OpenSSL, Apple, LibreSSL, pyca, wolfSSL Name-Constraint inconsistency in RFC 5280 implementation
Overview This note covers differences in how TLS libraries interpret X.509 Name Constraints. A certificate that one library accepts may be rejected by another. Some of those differences are defects; others follow from behavior that RFC 5280 does not fully specify. Description The observed differences concern DNS name comparison, IP address handling, URI-authority parsing, and wildcard matching. These include both implementation defects and behavior not fully specified by RFC 5280. DNS-name comparison. RFC 5280 requires case-insensitive matching for DNS names. GnuTLS compared some names' case-sensitivity at the time of reporting (CVE-2026-3833, later fixed in 3.8.13). A distinct Go report con
Read at CERT/CC Vulnerability Notes
- Vendor
- Apple, OpenSSL
- Product
- OpenSSL, Mozilla NSS / GnuTLS / libgcrypt
- Fix
- available
- Exposure class
- Operating system
Why it ranks 19 (Routine)
- Product class: operating system
- Fix available
- CERT coordination
- Recency: items published within 24 hours gain 15, within 72 hours 6, within 7 days 2.
Links
- CERT/CC Vulnerability Notes (kb.cert.org)
- CVE-2026-3833 on this site · NVD · CVE.org · Vulnpedia
- CVE-2026-34073 on this site · NVD · CVE.org · Vulnpedia
Related coverage
Other items that share a CVE or were clustered with this one.