CVE-2026-125336VulnerabilityPublished 12 Nov 2026Updated 13 Nov 2026

Node node forge: Prior to 1.4.3, pki.verifyCertificateChain() in lib/x509.js does not decode or enforce the X.509

Affects node-node-forgeSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-125336· High 7.4

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.4 High · fixed in 1.4.3 : patch node-node-forge soon.

Data as of 13 Nov 2026, 22:32 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.4High

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 3.1	7.4

Patch: Available – fixed in 1.4.3

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 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 13 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Ubuntu 22.04 LTSnode-node-forge`pkg:deb/ubuntu/node-node-forge?arch=source&distro=jammy`Other threats	Affected =0.10.0~dfsg-3 =1.2.1~dfsg-2	Fixed in–
Ubuntu 20.04 LTSnode-node-forge`pkg:deb/ubuntu/node-node-forge?arch=source&distro=focal`Other threats	Affected =0.8.5~dfsg-2 =0.9.1~dfsg-1	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade node-forge to version 1.4.3 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed. Versions prior to 1.4.3 do not enforce the nameConstraints extension properly, so updating is necessary to ensure correct certificate chain validation.

Description

Node-forge versions prior to 1.4.3 have a vulnerability in the pki.verifyCertificateChain() function where the X.509 nameConstraints extension is not properly decoded or enforced during certificate path validation. This allows a name-constrained certificate authority with a non-critical extension to issue certificates with subject names outside permitted subtrees, potentially enabling impersonation attacks. The issue is fixed in version 1.4.3.

Impact

An attacker controlling a name-constrained CA with a non-critical nameConstraints extension and access to its private key or the ability to obtain out-of-scope certificates can issue certificates that impersonate names outside the delegated namespace. This undermines the trust model of TLS connections validated by node-forge, potentially leading to high-impact impersonation attacks. There is no known exploitation in the wild.

Summary

Forge (node-forge) is a JavaScript implementation of TLS. Before version 1.4.3, the pki.verifyCertificateChain() function in lib/x509.js fails to decode or enforce the X.509 nameConstraints extension when validating certificate chains. This flaw permits a name-constrained CA with a non-critical nameConstraints extension to issue leaf certificates with subjectAltName dNSName or commonName values outside the allowed namespace or inside excluded subtrees. Node-forge accepts such chains, potentially allowing impersonation of names outside the delegated namespace, including attacks against forge.tls clients. Chains without nameConstraints or with critical nameConstraints extensions are not affected. The vulnerability is resolved in version 1.4.3.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 13 Nov 2026, 22:32 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats