Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-105483High confidence
nodejs node: Improper Certificate Validation
nodejs · node
7.4HighCVSS 3.0
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs nodejs node and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
6 package statesRelease-specific package status
Alpine, Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
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 release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpine v3.23v3.23 · main | nodejs | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 24.22.1-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 23 Oct 2026 |
| Debian trixietrixie · source | nodejs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 23 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | nodejs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 23 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | nodejs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 23 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | nodejs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 23 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | nodejs | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 23 Oct 2026 |
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
A flaw in Node.js TLS hostname verification allows a certificate without a matching IP address SAN to authenticate a connection to an IPv4 address when the host is written with non-ASCII characters, such as fullwidth digits (`１２７.0.0.1`). `tls.checkServerIdentity()` did not recognize such hosts as IP addresses, even though they normalize and resolve to a regular IPv4 address, and matched them against the certificate DNS names and Common Name instead. A certificate containing `DNS:127.0.0.1` or `DNS:*.0.0.1` could therefore be accepted for an IP endpoint it was not issued for. This is a regression introduced after the fix for CVE-2026-48618. This vulnerability affects Node.js **26.x** and **24.x**.
What
A flaw in Node.js TLS hostname verification allows a certificate without a matching IP address SAN to authenticate a connection to an IPv4 address when the host is written with non-ASCII characters, such as fullwidth digits (`１２７.0.0.1`). `tls.checkServerIdentity()` did not recognize such hosts as IP addresses, even though they normalize and resolve to a regular IPv4 address, and matched them against the certificate DNS names and Common Name instead. A certificate containing `DNS:127.0.0.1` or `DNS:*.0.0.1` could therefore be accepted for an IP endpoint it was not issued for. This is a regression introduced after the fix for CVE-2026-48618. This vulnerability affects Node.js **26.x** and **24.x**.
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
A flaw in Node.js TLS hostname verification allows a certificate without a matching IP address SAN to authenticate a connection to an IPv4 address when the host is written with non-ASCII characters, such as fullwidth digits (`１２７.0.0.1`). `tls.checkServerIdentity()` did not recognize such hosts as IP addresses, even though they normalize and resolve to a regular IPv4 address, and matched them against the certificate DNS names and Common Name instead. A certificate containing `DNS:127.0.0.1` or `DNS:*.0.0.1` could therefore be accepted for an IP endpoint it was not issued for. This is a regression introduced after the fix for CVE-2026-48618. This vulnerability affects Node.js **26.x** and **24.x**.
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 No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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 None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- 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:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NCommon 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.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.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.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.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.
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. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- node: 24.22.0 ≤ 24.22.0, 26.12.0 ≤ 26.12.0
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- 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 23 Oct 2026 · Last source change 23 Oct 2026, 16:15 UTC · CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source Unavailable
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceNo official EUVD mapping
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: removed mitigation: acn.gov.it/node.js-risolte-molteplici-vulnerabilita-1; removed remediation: acn.gov.it/node.js-risolte-molteplici-vulnerabilita-1.CNA ↗
- Before
- mitigation: acn.gov.it/node.js-risolte-molteplici-vulnerabilita-1 · remediation: acn.gov.it/node.js-risolte-molteplici-vulnerabilita-1
- After
- no authoritative guidance recorded
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.CNA ↗
- Before
- The authority advisory does not provide a concise affected-product range. · Fixed: The authority publishes remediation guidance. Confirm the exact fixed release in the linked primary advisory.
- After
- node: 24.22.0 ≤ 24.22.0, 26.12.0 ≤ 26.12.0 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Mitigation available to Awaiting fix.CNA ↗
- Before
- Mitigation available
- After
- Awaiting fix
- SeveritySeverity changed from Unknown to High.CNA ↗
- Before
- Unknown
- After
- High
- CVSS scoreCVSS score changed from not recorded to 7.4 (CVSS 3.0 · CNA · CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N).CNA ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- 7.4 (CVSS 3.0 · CNA · CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N)
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.Official national cybersecurity authority ↗
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.