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 0.21% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-85088High confidence
Apache Thrift, Apache Thrift: The C++ and D clients fall back to the certificate Common Name when subjectAltName entries are present but do not match
Apache Software Foundation · Apache Thrift
6.9MediumCVSS 4.0
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Fix availability varies by productMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 4 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
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
- Confirm that the asset runs Apache Software Foundation Apache Thrift and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 4 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Debian Security Tracker: 4 affected package states with no published fix
Distribution package intelligence
5 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Package result overrides the generic status
BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 4 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | thrift | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | thrift | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | thrift | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | thrift | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | thrift | 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 5 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative 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.
CVE-2026-85088 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitythrift: thrift: Man-in-the-middle attacks via improper certificate validation
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 7
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 7
- perl-thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- python3-thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift-devel as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift-glib as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift-qt as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI (RHEL AI) 3
- Summary
- A flaw was found in Apache Thrift. During Transport Layer Security (TLS) certificate validation, the client libraries improperly evaluate the certificate's Common Name (CN) when subject alternative name (SAN) entries do not match the target host. A network-positioned attacker possessing a trusted certificate matching the host's Common Name can exploit this vulnerability to impersonate the legitimate server. Successful exploitation allows the attacker to intercept or tamper with encrypted communications.
- Remediation
- For details on how to apply this update, which includes the changes described in this advisory, refer to: https://images.redhat.com/
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 4 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch in the C++ and D libraries of Apache Thrift. Both libraries install a default access manager for client sockets — TSSLSocketFactory does so in C++, and the accessManager property does so in D — which compares the peer certificate against the host name that was connected to. That comparison walks the subjectAltName dNSName entries first and consults the certificate Common Name afterwards. A name that does not match yields a "skip" result rather than a rejection, so a certificate whose subjectAltName entries are all present and all non-matching falls through to the Common Name, which can then satisfy the check. RFC 6125 section 6.4.4, and RFC 9525 section 2, require that the Common Name is not consulted when a dNSName subjectAltName is present. A certificate carrying subjectAltName entries for one name and a Common Name for another is therefore accepted for a connection to the second name. Exploitation requires an attacker positioned on the network path who holds a certificate that chains to a certificate authority in the client's trust store and whose Common Name matches the connected host name. Public certificate authorities have not issued on Common Name alone for many years, so this is principally a concern for deployments using a private or enterprise public-key infrastructure. This issue affects the C++ library of Apache Thrift from 0.7.0 through 0.24.0 and the D library from 0.9.0 through 0.24.0. Users should upgrade to 0.25.0.
What
Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch in the C++ and D libraries of Apache Thrift. Both libraries install a default access manager for client sockets — TSSLSocketFactory does so in C++, and the accessManager property does so in D — which compares the peer certificate against the host name that was connected to. That comparison walks the subjectAltName dNSName entries first and consults the certificate Common Name afterwards. A name that does not match yields a "skip" result rather than a rejection, so a certificate whose subjectAltName entries are all present and all non-matching falls through to the Common Name, which can then satisfy the check. RFC 6125 section 6.4.4, and RFC 9525 section 2, require that the Common Name is not consulted when a dNSName subjectAltName is present. A certificate carrying subjectAltName entries for one name and a Common Name for another is therefore accepted for a connection to the second name. Exploitation requires an attacker positioned on the network path who holds a certificate that chains to a certificate authority in the client's trust store and whose Common Name matches the connected host name. Public certificate authorities have not issued on Common Name alone for many years, so this is principally a concern for deployments using a private or enterprise public-key infrastructure. This issue affects the C++ library of Apache Thrift from 0.7.0 through 0.24.0 and the D library from 0.9.0 through 0.24.0. Users should upgrade to 0.25.0.
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
Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch in the C++ and D libraries of Apache Thrift. Both libraries install a default access manager for client sockets — TSSLSocketFactory does so in C++, and the accessManager property does so in D — which compares the peer certificate against the host name that was connected to. That comparison walks the subjectAltName dNSName entries first and consults the certificate Common Name afterwards. A name that does not match yields a "skip" result rather than a rejection, so a certificate whose subjectAltName entries are all present and all non-matching falls through to the Common Name, which can then satisfy the check. RFC 6125 section 6.4.4, and RFC 9525 section 2, require that the Common Name is not consulted when a dNSName subjectAltName is present. A certificate carrying subjectAltName entries for one name and a Common Name for another is therefore accepted for a connection to the second name. Exploitation requires an attacker positioned on the network path who holds a certificate that chains to a certificate authority in the client's trust store and whose Common Name matches the connected host name. Public certificate authorities have not issued on Common Name alone for many years, so this is principally a concern for deployments using a private or enterprise public-key infrastructure. This issue affects the C++ library of Apache Thrift from 0.7.0 through 0.24.0 and the D library from 0.9.0 through 0.24.0. Users should upgrade to 0.25.0.
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
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- 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:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:UCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: 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.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: 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 availability varies by product
- Affected
- thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 7
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 7
- perl-thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- python3-thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift-devel as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift-glib as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift-qt as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 8
- thrift as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- thrift.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI (RHEL AI) 3
- Fixed
- perl-thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@noarch@public-hummingbird-aarch64-rpms as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- perl-thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@noarch@public-hummingbird-x86_64-rpms as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- python3-thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@aarch64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- python3-thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@x86_64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@aarch64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@src as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@x86_64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-devel-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@aarch64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-devel-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@x86_64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-glib-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@aarch64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-glib-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@x86_64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-qt-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@aarch64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- thrift-qt-0:0.25.0-0.1.hum1@x86_64 as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- Action
- Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
- 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 2 Oct 2026 · Last source change 2 Oct 2026, 17:40 UTC · CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-10-03
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-91418
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.Red Hat Product Security ↗
- Before
- Apache Thrift: < 0.25.0 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- After
- Apache Thrift: < 0.25.0 · Fixed: For details on how to apply this update, which includes the changes described in this advisory, refer to: https://images.redhat.com/
- Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.Red Hat Product Security ↗
- Before
- Awaiting fix
- After
- Patch available
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-91418 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-91418"}
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
CVE published
Fixed release recorded from official guidance
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.