TLS host impersonation via CommonName fallback
Published May 27, 2026 · Updated May 27, 2026
Improper certificate validation in Erlang/OTP public_key allows man-in-the-middle attackers to impersonate out-of-scope TLS hosts. pubkey_cert:validate_names/6 ignores a subject CommonName when enforcing DNS nameConstraints, while public_key:pkix_verify_hostname/3 accepts that CommonName when SAN is absent. Exploitation requires control of a DNS-constrained subordinate CA key and interception of TLS traffic; success exposes data and permits traffic modification under the forged host identity.
Summary
What happened
Improper certificate validation in Erlang/OTP public_key allows man-in-the-middle attackers to impersonate out-of-scope TLS hosts. pubkey_cert:validate_names/6 ignores a subject CommonName when enforcing DNS nameConstraints, while public_key:pkix_verify_hostname/3 accepts that CommonName when SAN is absent. Exploitation requires control of a DNS-constrained subordinate CA key and interception of TLS traffic; success exposes data and permits traffic modification under the forged host identity.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2026-42790
- Published
- May 27, 2026
- Updated
- May 27, 2026
- Vendor
- Erlang
- Product
- Erlang/OTP
- Classifications
- CWE-297, CWE-295, T1557
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- May 27, 2026CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- May 27, 2026Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=1.4 <* changes=[{"at":"1.15.1.7","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"1.17.1.3","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"1.20.3.1","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"1.21.1","status":"unaffected"}]
- Affected versionversion=19.3 <* changes=[{"at":"26.2.5.21","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"27.3.4.12","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"28.5.0.1","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"29.0.1","status":"unaffected"}]
- Affected versionversion=b0c245e8132bb13171e277b1af59c0cec00c9459 <* changes=[{"at":"0769050c69d73762672b0db1347b6993a5b31759","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"fb67c6d1836f51105a96d8b769e71e4215a79457","status":"unaffected"},{"at":"21abed64eb2026b5f82f432709e4e932f9be389a","status":"unaffected"}]
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
No public exploit references are available in this record.
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo