VulnerabilityPublished 8 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-123613: rustls · Improper Input Validation

Affects rustlsSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 0.23.45 when convenient.

Data as of 8 Nov 2026, 01:50 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (VulnCheck)	CVSS 4.0	6.9
CNA (VulnCheck)	CVSS 3.1	5.3

Patch: Available – fixed in 0.23.45

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 8 Nov 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 7 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade rustls to 0.23.45.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
rustlsrustls	Affected >=0.23.13 <0.23.45	Fixed in 0.23.45
crates.iorustls`pkg:cargo/rustls`Other threats	Affected >=0.23.13 <0.23.45	Fixed in 0.23.45

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Upgrade rustls to version 0.23.45 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed. No other mitigation is indicated or required.

Description

CVE-2026-123613 is a vulnerability in rustls versions from 0.23.13 up to but not including 0.23.45. It involves improper input validation where TLS 1.3 handshake messages are accepted at incorrect encryption levels following a key change in the same record. This flaw allows a peer or on-path attacker to send a plaintext EncryptedExtensions message alongside the ServerHello, which rustls mistakenly accepts as unencrypted.

Impact

An attacker who is a peer or positioned on the network path can exploit this vulnerability to send unencrypted handshake messages that rustls incorrectly accepts. This could undermine the confidentiality guarantees of the TLS 1.3 handshake, potentially exposing sensitive handshake data. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 6.9 (medium severity), reflecting network attack vector, low complexity, no privileges or user interaction required, and limited confidentiality impact.

Summary

Rustls versions >=0.23.13 and <0.23.45 improperly handle TLS 1.3 handshake messages due to Deframer::aligned not enforcing RFC 8446 record-boundary alignment. Specifically, after a key change message within the same record, rustls accepts handshake messages at the wrong encryption level. This enables an attacker to pack a plaintext EncryptedExtensions message with the ServerHello, bypassing expected encryption protections. The issue is fixed in rustls version 0.23.45.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Nov 2026, 01:50 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats