Every CVE Search/ Get API key

CVE-2026-33753

Improper Certificate Validation in rfc3161-client

6.2 MediumFix available

rfc3161-client is a Python library implementing the Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) described in RFC 3161. Prior to 1.0.6, an Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.6.

Attack profile

How easy it is to exploit

Attack vector
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges needed
None
User interaction
None

What an attacker can affect

Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Exploit likelihood

0.19%Up 0.2 points since Apr 9, 2026
90%50%10%1%

What each source reports

CVE List Score used 6.2

Improper Certificate Validation in rfc3161-client

rfc3161-client is a Python library implementing the Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) described in RFC 3161. Prior to 1.0.6, an Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.6.

Record
CVE-2026-33753
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-295
Updated
2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-20480 6.2

rfc3161-client is a Python library implementing the Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) described in RFC 3161. Prior to 1.0.6, an Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.6.

Record
EUVD-2026-20480
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Updated
2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-3xxc-pwj6-jgrj 6.2

rfc3161-client Has Improper Certificate Validation

Summary

An Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely.

Details

The root cause lies in rfc3161_client.verify.Verifier._verify_leaf_certs(). The library attempts to locate the leaf certificate within the parsed TimeStampResponse PKCS#7 SignedData bag using a naive algorithm:

leaf_certificate_found = None
for cert in certs:
    if not [c for c in certs if c.issuer == cert.subject]:
        leaf_certificate_found = cert
        break

This loop erroneously assumes that the valid leaf certificate is simply the first certificate in the bag that does not issue any other certificate. It does not rely on checking the ESSCertID or ESSCertIDv2 cryptographic bindings specified in RFC 3161 (which binds the signature securely to the exact signer certificate).

An attacker can exploit this by:

  1. Acquiring a legitimate, authentic TimeStampResponse from any widely trusted public TSA (e.g., FreeTSA) that chains up to a Root CA trusted by the client.
  2. Generating a self-signed spoofed "proxy" certificate A with the exact Subject (e.g., CN=Intended Corporate TSA) and ExtendedKeyUsage (id-kp-timeStamping) required by the client's VerifierBuilder.
  3. Generating a dummy certificate D issued by the actual FreeTSA leaf certificate.
  4. Appending both A and D to the certificates list in the PKCS#7 SignedData of the TimeStampResponse.

When _verify_leaf_certs() executes, the dummy certificate D disqualifies the authentic FreeTSA leaf from being selected (because FreeTSA now technically "issues" D within the bag). The loop then evaluates the spoofed certificate A, realizes it issues nothing else in the bag, and selects it as leaf_certificate_found.

The library then processes the common_name and EKU checks exactly against A. Since A was explicitly forged to pass these checks, verification succeeds. Finally, the OpenSSL pkcs7_verify backend validates the actual cryptographic signature using the authentic FreeTSA certificate and trusted roots (ignoring the injected certs). The application wrongly trusts that the timestamp was granted by the pinned TSA.

PoC

The environment simulation and the PoC script have been included in the poc.py and Dockerfile artifacts:

Dockerfile (poc/Dockerfile):

FROM python:3.11-slim
RUN apt-get update && apt-get install -y build-essential libssl-dev libffi-dev python3-dev cargo rustc pkg-config git && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
WORKDIR /app
COPY . /app/rfc3161-client
RUN pip install cryptography requests asn1crypto
WORKDIR /app/rfc3161-client
RUN pip install .
COPY poc/poc.py /app/poc.py
WORKDIR /app
CMD ["python", "poc.py"]

The attack flow locally demonstrated in poc/poc.py:

import base64
import requests
from rfc3161_client import TimestampRequestBuilder, decode_timestamp_response, HashAlgorithm
from rfc3161_client.verify import VerifierBuilder
from cryptography import x509
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives import hashes, serialization
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import rsa
from cryptography.x509.oid import NameOID, ExtendedKeyUsageOID
import datetime
from asn1crypto import cms, tsp

def main():
    print("[*] Generating TimeStampRequest...")
    req_builder = TimestampRequestBuilder(
        data=b"hello world",
        hash_algorithm=HashAlgorithm.SHA256,
       …
Record
GHSA-3xxc-pwj6-jgrj
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-295
Updated
2026-11-02
NVD 6.2

rfc3161-client is a Python library implementing the Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) described in RFC 3161. Prior to 1.0.6, an Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.6.

Record
CVE-2026-33753
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
CVSS 3.1
7.5 HighCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-295
Updated
2026-11-02
OSV 6.2

Improper Certificate Validation in rfc3161-client

rfc3161-client is a Python library implementing the Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) described in RFC 3161. Prior to 1.0.6, an Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.6.

Record
CVE-2026-33753
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-295
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-3xxc-pwj6-jgrj 6.2

rfc3161-client Has Improper Certificate Validation

Summary

An Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely.

Details

The root cause lies in rfc3161_client.verify.Verifier._verify_leaf_certs(). The library attempts to locate the leaf certificate within the parsed TimeStampResponse PKCS#7 SignedData bag using a naive algorithm:

leaf_certificate_found = None
for cert in certs:
    if not [c for c in certs if c.issuer == cert.subject]:
        leaf_certificate_found = cert
        break

This loop erroneously assumes that the valid leaf certificate is simply the first certificate in the bag that does not issue any other certificate. It does not rely on checking the ESSCertID or ESSCertIDv2 cryptographic bindings specified in RFC 3161 (which binds the signature securely to the exact signer certificate).

An attacker can exploit this by:

  1. Acquiring a legitimate, authentic TimeStampResponse from any widely trusted public TSA (e.g., FreeTSA) that chains up to a Root CA trusted by the client.
  2. Generating a self-signed spoofed "proxy" certificate A with the exact Subject (e.g., CN=Intended Corporate TSA) and ExtendedKeyUsage (id-kp-timeStamping) required by the client's VerifierBuilder.
  3. Generating a dummy certificate D issued by the actual FreeTSA leaf certificate.
  4. Appending both A and D to the certificates list in the PKCS#7 SignedData of the TimeStampResponse.

When _verify_leaf_certs() executes, the dummy certificate D disqualifies the authentic FreeTSA leaf from being selected (because FreeTSA now technically "issues" D within the bag). The loop then evaluates the spoofed certificate A, realizes it issues nothing else in the bag, and selects it as leaf_certificate_found.

The library then processes the common_name and EKU checks exactly against A. Since A was explicitly forged to pass these checks, verification succeeds. Finally, the OpenSSL pkcs7_verify backend validates the actual cryptographic signature using the authentic FreeTSA certificate and trusted roots (ignoring the injected certs). The application wrongly trusts that the timestamp was granted by the pinned TSA.

PoC

The environment simulation and the PoC script have been included in the poc.py and Dockerfile artifacts:

Dockerfile (poc/Dockerfile):

FROM python:3.11-slim
RUN apt-get update && apt-get install -y build-essential libssl-dev libffi-dev python3-dev cargo rustc pkg-config git && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
WORKDIR /app
COPY . /app/rfc3161-client
RUN pip install cryptography requests asn1crypto
WORKDIR /app/rfc3161-client
RUN pip install .
COPY poc/poc.py /app/poc.py
WORKDIR /app
CMD ["python", "poc.py"]

The attack flow locally demonstrated in poc/poc.py:

import base64
import requests
from rfc3161_client import TimestampRequestBuilder, decode_timestamp_response, HashAlgorithm
from rfc3161_client.verify import VerifierBuilder
from cryptography import x509
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives import hashes, serialization
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import rsa
from cryptography.x509.oid import NameOID, ExtendedKeyUsageOID
import datetime
from asn1crypto import cms, tsp

def main():
    print("[*] Generating TimeStampRequest...")
    req_builder = TimestampRequestBuilder(
        data=b"hello world",
        hash_algorithm=HashAlgorithm.SHA256,
       …
Record
GHSA-3xxc-pwj6-jgrj
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Weakness
CWE-295
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVPYSEC-2026-3051 6.2

rfc3161-client Has Improper Certificate Validation

Summary

An Authorization Bypass vulnerability in rfc3161-client's signature verification allows any attacker to impersonate a trusted TimeStamping Authority (TSA). By exploiting a logic flaw in how the library extracts the leaf certificate from an unordered PKCS#7 bag of certificates, an attacker can append a spoofed certificate matching the target common_name and Extended Key Usage (EKU) requirements. This tricks the library into verifying these authorization rules against the forged certificate while validating the cryptographic signature against an actual trusted TSA (such as FreeTSA), thereby bypassing the intended TSA authorization pinning entirely.

Details

The root cause lies in rfc3161_client.verify.Verifier._verify_leaf_certs(). The library attempts to locate the leaf certificate within the parsed TimeStampResponse PKCS#7 SignedData bag using a naive algorithm:

leaf_certificate_found = None
for cert in certs:
    if not [c for c in certs if c.issuer == cert.subject]:
        leaf_certificate_found = cert
        break

This loop erroneously assumes that the valid leaf certificate is simply the first certificate in the bag that does not issue any other certificate. It does not rely on checking the ESSCertID or ESSCertIDv2 cryptographic bindings specified in RFC 3161 (which binds the signature securely to the exact signer certificate).

An attacker can exploit this by:

  1. Acquiring a legitimate, authentic TimeStampResponse from any widely trusted public TSA (e.g., FreeTSA) that chains up to a Root CA trusted by the client.
  2. Generating a self-signed spoofed "proxy" certificate A with the exact Subject (e.g., CN=Intended Corporate TSA) and ExtendedKeyUsage (id-kp-timeStamping) required by the client's VerifierBuilder.
  3. Generating a dummy certificate D issued by the actual FreeTSA leaf certificate.
  4. Appending both A and D to the certificates list in the PKCS#7 SignedData of the TimeStampResponse.

When _verify_leaf_certs() executes, the dummy certificate D disqualifies the authentic FreeTSA leaf from being selected (because FreeTSA now technically "issues" D within the bag). The loop then evaluates the spoofed certificate A, realizes it issues nothing else in the bag, and selects it as leaf_certificate_found.

The library then processes the common_name and EKU checks exactly against A. Since A was explicitly forged to pass these checks, verification succeeds. Finally, the OpenSSL pkcs7_verify backend validates the actual cryptographic signature using the authentic FreeTSA certificate and trusted roots (ignoring the injected certs). The application wrongly trusts that the timestamp was granted by the pinned TSA.

PoC

The environment simulation and the PoC script have been included in the poc.py and Dockerfile artifacts:

Dockerfile (poc/Dockerfile):

FROM python:3.11-slim
RUN apt-get update && apt-get install -y build-essential libssl-dev libffi-dev python3-dev cargo rustc pkg-config git && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
WORKDIR /app
COPY . /app/rfc3161-client
RUN pip install cryptography requests asn1crypto
WORKDIR /app/rfc3161-client
RUN pip install .
COPY poc/poc.py /app/poc.py
WORKDIR /app
CMD ["python", "poc.py"]

The attack flow locally demonstrated in poc/poc.py:

import base64
import requests
from rfc3161_client import TimestampRequestBuilder, decode_timestamp_response, HashAlgorithm
from rfc3161_client.verify import VerifierBuilder
from cryptography import x509
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives import hashes, serialization
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import rsa
from cryptography.x509.oid import NameOID, ExtendedKeyUsageOID
import datetime
from asn1crypto import cms, tsp

def main():
    print("[*] Generating TimeStampRequest...")
    req_builder = TimestampRequestBuilder(
        data=b"hello world",
        hash_algorithm=HashAlgorithm.SHA256,
       …
Record
PYSEC-2026-3051
CVSS 3.1
6.2 MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVopenSUSE-SU-2026:10546-1 No score

python311-rfc3161-client-1.0.6-1.1 on GA media

These are all security issues fixed in the python311-rfc3161-client-1.0.6-1.1 package on the GA media of openSUSE Tumbleweed.

Record
openSUSE-SU-2026:10546-1
Updated
2026-11-02

Affected products

Affected packages

Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
rfc3161-client
PyPI
through 1.0.5
1.0.6
rfc3161-client
PyPI
before 1.0.6, plus listed versions
0.0.20.0.30.0.40.1.00.1.1
Show 7 moreShow less
0.1.21.0.01.0.11.0.21.0.31.0.41.0.5
1.0.6
python-rfc3161-client
openSUSE:Tumbleweed
before 1.0.6-1.1
1.0.6-1.1

History

History
RecordedChangedSources
first indexedCVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV

Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.

In short

CVE-2026-33753 is a medium vulnerability (CVSS 6.2) in Trailofbits Rfc3161-client, published April 8, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.19%, the 9th percentile. Fixed in rfc3161-client 1.0.6.

References

This page doesn't list everything

Left out here: the rest of 3 source descriptions. The JSON record has them.

MoveEnter Open