← Back
CWE-295

1,690 CVEs • Abstraction: Base

Improper Certificate Validation

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (1,690)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
1Bitdefender
1Total Security
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 18, 2024
8.6 HIGH· v4
7.4 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability has been identified in Bitdefender Total Security HTTPS scanning functionality where the software fails to properly validate website certificates. Specifically, if a site certificate lacks the "Server Aut...Show more
A vulnerability has been identified in Bitdefender Total Security HTTPS scanning functionality where the software fails to properly validate website certificates. Specifically, if a site certificate lacks the "Server Authentication" specification in the Extended Key Usage extension, the product does not verify the certificate's compliance with the site, deeming such certificates as valid. This flaw could allow an attacker to perform a Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) attack, intercepting and potentially altering communications between the user and the website.Show less
1Bitdefender
1Total Security
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 18, 2024
8.6 HIGH· v4
6.8 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability has been identified in the Bitdefender Total Security HTTPS scanning functionality where the product incorrectly checks the site's certificate, which allows an attacker to make MITM SSL connections to an...Show more
A vulnerability has been identified in the Bitdefender Total Security HTTPS scanning functionality where the product incorrectly checks the site's certificate, which allows an attacker to make MITM SSL connections to an arbitrary site. The product trusts certificates that are issued using the MD5 and SHA1 collision hash functions which allow attackers to create rogue certificates that appear legitimate.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 16, 2024
N/A· v4
8.0 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability has been identified within Rancher that can be exploited in narrow circumstances through a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. An attacker would need to have control of an expired domain or execute a DNS...Show more
A vulnerability has been identified within Rancher that can be exploited in narrow circumstances through a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. An attacker would need to have control of an expired domain or execute a DNS spoofing/hijacking attack against the domain to exploit this vulnerability. The targeted domain is the one used as the Rancher URL.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 15, 2024
N/A· v4
4.9 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
An issue was discovered in Samsung eMMC with KLMAG2GE4A and KLM8G1WEMB firmware. Code bypass through Electromagnetic Fault Injection allows an attacker to successfully authenticate and write to the RPMB (Replay Protected...Show more
An issue was discovered in Samsung eMMC with KLMAG2GE4A and KLM8G1WEMB firmware. Code bypass through Electromagnetic Fault Injection allows an attacker to successfully authenticate and write to the RPMB (Replay Protected Memory Block) area without possessing secret information.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 15, 2024
8.7 HIGH· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
Agent Dart is an agent library built for Internet Computer for Dart and Flutter apps. Prior to version 1.0.0-dev.29, certificate verification in `lib/agent/certificate.dart` does not occur properly. During the delegation...Show more
Agent Dart is an agent library built for Internet Computer for Dart and Flutter apps. Prior to version 1.0.0-dev.29, certificate verification in `lib/agent/certificate.dart` does not occur properly. During the delegation verification in the `_checkDelegation` function, the canister_ranges aren't verified. The impact of not checking the canister_ranges is that a subnet can sign canister responses in behalf of another subnet. The certificate’s timestamp, i.e /time path, is also not verified, meaning that the certificate effectively has no expiration time. Version 1.0.0-dev.29 implements appropriate certificate verification.Show less
1Microsoft
14Windows 10 1507
Windows 10 1607Windows 10 1809+11 more
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 8, 2024
N/A· v4
7.4 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Windows Secure Channel Spoofing Vulnerability
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 8, 2024
7.0 HIGH· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
SSL Pinning Bypass in eWeLink Some hardware products allows local ATTACKER to Decrypt TLS communication and Extract secrets to clone the device via Flash the modified firmware
1Cisco
1Nexus Dashboard Orchestrator
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 2, 2024
N/A· v4
5.9 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A vulnerability in the SSL/TLS implementation of Cisco Nexus Dashboard Orchestrator (NDO) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to intercept sensitive information from an affected device.  This vulnerab...Show more
A vulnerability in the SSL/TLS implementation of Cisco Nexus Dashboard Orchestrator (NDO) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to intercept sensitive information from an affected device.  This vulnerability exists because the Cisco NDO Validate Peer Certificate site management feature validates the certificates for Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC), Cisco Cloud Network Controller (CNC), and Cisco Nexus Dashboard only when a new site is added or an existing one is reregistered. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by using machine-in-the-middle techniques to intercept the traffic between the affected device and Cisco NDO and then using a crafted certificate to impersonate the affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to learn sensitive information during communications between these devices.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 27, 2024
5.4 MEDIUM· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
In versions of the PEADM Forge Module prior to 3.24.0 a security misconfiguration was discovered.
1Tomtretbar
1Mikrotik
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 27, 2024
4.9 MEDIUM· v4
7.4 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Improper Certificate Validation in Checkmk Exchange plugin MikroTik allows attackers in MitM position to intercept traffic. This issue affects MikroTik: from 2.0.0 through 2.5.5, from 0.4a_mk through 2.0a.
1Hcltech
1Traveler For Microsoft Outlook
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 26, 2024
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
The HCL Traveler for Microsoft Outlook executable (HTMO.exe) is being flagged as potentially Malicious Software or an Unrecognized Application.
1Ibm
1Storage Defender
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 25, 2024
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
IBM Storage Defender 2.0.0 through 2.0.7 on-prem defender-sensor-cmd CLI does not validate server name during registration and unregistration operations which could expose sensitive information to an attacker with access...Show more
IBM Storage Defender 2.0.0 through 2.0.7 on-prem defender-sensor-cmd CLI does not validate server name during registration and unregistration operations which could expose sensitive information to an attacker with access to the system.Show less
1Planetfitness
1Planet Fitness Workouts
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 23, 2024
8.7 HIGH· v4
5.9 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The Planet Fitness Workouts iOS and Android mobile apps fail to properly validate TLS certificates, allowing an attacker with appropriate network access to obtain session tokens and sensitive information. Planet Fitness...Show more
The Planet Fitness Workouts iOS and Android mobile apps fail to properly validate TLS certificates, allowing an attacker with appropriate network access to obtain session tokens and sensitive information. Planet Fitness first addressed this vulnerability in version 9.8.12 (released on 2024-07-25) and more recently in version 9.9.13 (released on 2025-02-11).Show less
1Canonical
1Anbox Cloud
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 18, 2024
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Anbox Management Service, in versions 1.17.0 through 1.23.0, does not validate the TLS certificate provided to it by the Anbox Stream Agent. An attacker must be able to machine-in-the-middle the Anbox Stream Agent from w...Show more
Anbox Management Service, in versions 1.17.0 through 1.23.0, does not validate the TLS certificate provided to it by the Anbox Stream Agent. An attacker must be able to machine-in-the-middle the Anbox Stream Agent from within an internal network before they can attempt to take advantage of this.Show less
3Debian
HaxxNetapp
10Active Iq Unified Manager
Bootstrap OsCurl+7 more
Oct 15, 2026
Sep 11, 2024
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
When curl is told to use the Certificate Status Request TLS extension, often referred to as OCSP stapling, to verify that the server certificate is valid, it might fail to detect some OCSP problems and instead wrongly co...Show more
When curl is told to use the Certificate Status Request TLS extension, often referred to as OCSP stapling, to verify that the server certificate is valid, it might fail to detect some OCSP problems and instead wrongly consider the response as fine. If the returned status reports another error than 'revoked' (like for example 'unauthorized') it is not treated as a bad certficate.Show less
1Fortinet
1Forticlient
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 10, 2024
N/A· v4
8.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
AAn improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiClientWindows 7.2.0 through 7.2.2, 7.0.0 through 7.0.11, FortiClientLinux 7.2.0, 7.0.0 through 7.0.11 and FortiClientMac 7.0.0 through 7.0.11, 7.2.0 th...Show more
AAn improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiClientWindows 7.2.0 through 7.2.2, 7.0.0 through 7.0.11, FortiClientLinux 7.2.0, 7.0.0 through 7.0.11 and FortiClientMac 7.0.0 through 7.0.11, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4 may allow a remote and unauthenticated attacker to perform a Man-in-the-Middle attack on the communication channel between the FortiGate and the FortiClient during the ZTNA tunnel creationShow less
1Fortinet
1Forticlient
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 10, 2024
N/A· v4
5.9 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiClientWindows 6.4 all versions, 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, FortiClientMac 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientLinux 6.4 all ver...Show more
An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiClientWindows 6.4 all versions, 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, FortiClientMac 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientLinux 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientAndroid 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 and FortiClientiOS 5.6 all versions, 6.0.0 through 6.0.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.6 SAML SSO feature may allow an unauthenticated attacker to man-in-the-middle the communication between the FortiClient and  both the service provider and the identity provider.Show less
1Veeam
1Veeam Backup & Replication
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 7, 2024
N/A· v4
8.3 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
An improper certificate validation vulnerability in TLS certificate validation allows an attacker on the same network to intercept sensitive credentials during restore operations.
1Qnap
1Qumagie
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 6, 2024
1.0 LOW· v4
7.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
An improper certificate validation vulnerability has been reported to affect QuMagie. If exploited, the vulnerability could allow local network users to compromise the security of the system via unspecified vectors. We...Show more
An improper certificate validation vulnerability has been reported to affect QuMagie. If exploited, the vulnerability could allow local network users to compromise the security of the system via unspecified vectors. We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version: QuMagie 2.3.1 and laterShow less
2Arm
Trustedfirmware
2Mbed Tls
Mbed Tls
Jun 17, 2026
Sep 5, 2024
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.1. With TLS 1.3, when a server enables optional authentication of the client, if the client-provided certificate does not have appropriate values in if keyUsage or extKe...Show more
An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.1. With TLS 1.3, when a server enables optional authentication of the client, if the client-provided certificate does not have appropriate values in if keyUsage or extKeyUsage extensions, then the return value of mbedtls_ssl_get_verify_result() would incorrectly have the MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE and MBEDTLS_X509_BADCERT_KEY_USAGE bits clear. As a result, an attacker that had a certificate valid for uses other than TLS client authentication would nonetheless be able to use it for TLS client authentication. Only TLS 1.3 servers were affected, and only with optional authentication (with required authentication, the handshake would be aborted with a fatal alert).Show less