BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2018
CVE-2018-12608High confidence

This allowed a client with any domain validated certificate signed by a system-trusted root CA (as opposed to one signed by the configured CA root certificate) to authenticate

Unknown · Unknown

7.5HighCVSS 3.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.92% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Unknown and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

4 package states
Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcedocker.ioVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.18.03.1+dfsg1-2Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcedocker.ioVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.18.03.1+dfsg1-2Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcedocker.ioVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.18.03.1+dfsg1-2Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcedocker.ioVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.18.03.1+dfsg1-2Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Open-source package ranges1 source-attributed range

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
Gogithub.com/docker/dockerECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 17.06.0-ce17.06.0-ceOSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

0 current · 1 archived
CVE-2018-12608 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitymoby: cert signing bypassNo longer in the provider’s current catalogue
3 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • openshift-service-mesh/proxyv2-rhel8 as a component of OpenShift Service Mesh 2
  • openshift4/ose-agent-installer-api-server-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4
  • openshift4/ose-console-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4
Summary
A certificate signing vulnerability was found in Moby. This issue could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to validate a TLS certificate using Certificate Authorities (CA) from the system instead of only by a specified client CA root, which could allow bypassing of some certificate authorization rules, reducing system integrity.
Remediation
Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. For details on how to apply this update, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2024-0408

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

An issue was discovered in Docker Moby before 17.06.0. The Docker engine validated a client TLS certificate using both the configured client CA root certificate and all system roots on non-Windows systems. This allowed a client with any domain validated certificate signed by a system-trusted root CA (as opposed to one signed by the configured CA root certificate) to authenticate.

What

An issue was discovered in Docker Moby before 17.06.0. The Docker engine validated a client TLS certificate using both the configured client CA root certificate and all system roots on non-Windows systems. This allowed a client with any domain validated certificate signed by a system-trusted root CA (as opposed to one signed by the configured CA root certificate) to authenticate.

Why

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

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

An issue was discovered in Docker Moby before 17.06.0. The Docker engine validated a client TLS certificate using both the configured client CA root certificate and all system roots on non-Windows systems. This allowed a client with any domain validated certificate signed by a system-trusted root CA (as opposed to one signed by the configured CA root certificate) to authenticate.

Why

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

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Certificate Validation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-295 ↗

CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation. The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-295
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2018-010504Docker Moby における証明書検証に関する脆弱性

Docker Moby には、証明書検証に関する脆弱性が存在します。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
n/a
Fixed
Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. For details on how to apply this update, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258
Action
Apply the fixed release for the affected product branch as recorded by Red Hat Product Security. Validate the exact product and build in the linked advisory before deployment.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 10 Sept 2018 · Last source change 5 Aug 2024, 08:38 UTC · CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-01
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-0408
Product sourceUnavailable
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceNIST NVD
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed from remediation: access.redhat.com/CVE-2018-12608 to advisory no longer present in the provider's current catalogue.
    Before
    remediation: access.redhat.com/CVE-2018-12608
    After
    advisory no longer present in the provider's current catalogue
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
  2. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    n/a · Fixed: An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
    After
    n/a · Fixed: Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. For details on how to apply this update, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
  3. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2024-0408 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2024-0408"}
    ENISA EUVD ↗
  4. Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: added patch: github.com/33182; added remediation: github.com/33182.
    Before
    no authoritative guidance recorded
    After
    patch: github.com/33182 · remediation: github.com/33182
    github.com ↗
  5. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    n/a · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
    After
    n/a · Fixed: An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
    CNA ↗
  6. Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.
    Before
    Awaiting fix
    After
    Patch available
    github.com ↗
  7. SeveritySeverity changed from Unknown to High.
    Before
    Unknown
    After
    High
    NIST NVD ↗
  8. CVSS scoreCVSS score changed from not recorded to 7.5 (CVSS 3.0 · NIST NVD · CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N).
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    7.5 (CVSS 3.0 · NIST NVD · CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N)
    NIST NVD ↗
  9. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Fixed release recorded from official guidance
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-0408↗Red Hat Product Security security advisory↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2018-12608 · cve.blacktree.nl