TLS Hostname Verification Falls Back to CN After SAN Mismatch (CVE-2026-91769)
Published Last modified Sources: SUSE, Red Hat, Debian LTS, Ubuntu, Debian, BSI, OSV, Msrc Update Guide, CVE.org
What is affected, what to do
PHP's OpenSSL stream peer verification checks the certificate's subjectAltName entries first and, whenever no entry matches, falls back to the Common Name. RFC 6125 requires the CN to be ignored once the certificate presents any service identity, so a certificate carrying a non-matching DNS SAN was still accepted when its CN matched the requested peer_name.
An exploit is publicly available. Update PHP to version 8.2.34, PHP to version 8.3.35, PHP to version 8.4.26.
- Affected
- PHP
lt 8.2.0..8.2.34 - PHP
lt 8.3.0..8.3.35 - PHP
lt 8.4.0..8.4.26 - PHP
lt 8.5.0..8.5.11
- PHP
- Fixed in
- PHP
8.2.34 - PHP
8.3.35 - PHP
8.4.26 - PHP
8.5.11
- PHP
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
4.3
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v3
4.3
CVSS v3
Severity Medium on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: SUSE, Red Hat, Debian LTS, Ubuntu, Debian, BSI, OSV, Msrc Update Guide, CVE.org
0.2 %
EPSS score
Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 5.0
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Medium
Priority (0–325)
The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?
Read in glossary- 51.26 Methodology
Exploit maturity
An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.
Read in glossary- PoC (publicly reported)
XIEM Effective CVSS
XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.
Read in glossary- 4.3 Methodology
CVSS v3
CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.
Read in glossary- 4.3
EPSS score
The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.
Read in glossary- 0.2 %
- Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
EPSS percentile
The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.
Read in glossary- 5.0
- Low — this CVE sits in the lower 10% of all CVEs scored today.
KEV status
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossary- —
- Published
- CISA assessment (SSVC)
- Exploitation: none known · not automatable · Technical impact: partial
- Source: CISA Vulnrichment, as of 28 September 2026
CWE
CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.
Read in glossary- CWE-297
Detection rules
No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.
Classification under NIS2 and CRA
Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.
NIS2
NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.
Read in glossary- Handle the vulnerability in regular vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2.
CRA
The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.
Read in glossary- From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
ISO/IEC 27001
ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.
Read in glossary- Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.
Description
PHP's OpenSSL stream peer verification checks the certificate's subjectAltName entries first and, whenever no entry matches, falls back to the Common Name. RFC 6125 requires the CN to be ignored once the certificate presents any service identity, so a certificate carrying a non-matching DNS SAN was still accepted when its CN matched the requested peer_name. A certificate trusted by the client for one name can therefore be used to impersonate another.
Source: suse_csaf, redhat_csaf, Debian LTS Advisories, Ubuntu Security Notices, Debian Security Advisories, BSI WID Portal, BSI CSAF, OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities), Microsoft Security Update Guide, NVD (NIST), cvelistv5, CVE.org (MITRE)
Affected products
The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| PHP Group | PHP |
|
|
| php | php |
|
|
| Open Source | PHP |
|
|
Distribution and container packages (12)
Downstream packages (e.g. Bitnami, Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat). Versions refer to the distribution, not the vendor.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| bitnami | libphp |
|
|
| bitnami | php |
|
|
| bitnami | php-min |
|
|
Vendors and products
Affected operating systems
| Linux | ubuntu | php5 | trusty |
| Linux | ubuntu | php7.0 | xenial |
| Linux | ubuntu | php7.2 | bionic |
| Linux | ubuntu | php7.4 | focal |
| Linux | ubuntu | php8.1 | jammy |
| Linux | debian | php8.2 | bookworm |
| Linux | ubuntu | php8.3 | noble |
| Linux | debian | php8.4 | trixie |
| Linux | ubuntu | php8.5 | resolute |
| Linux | ubuntu | php8.5 | stonking |
Weakness classes (CWE)
CWE-297Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch
Variant
The product communicates with a host that provides a certificate, but the product does not properly ensure that the certificate is actually associated with that host.
Entry at MITRE CWE-297
Public exploit references
Publicly reported proof-of-concepts, exploit modules and detection templates for this vulnerability. NEOSEC links to the original sources only and does not provide any exploit code.
| Reference tagged as exploit | github.com (opens in a new tab) | PoC (publicly reported)reported, not verified | — |
References & sources
- github.comphp/php-src/security/advisories/GHSA-vvx9-73fr-5jjxVendor advisory, Vendor advisory, Exploit, advisory
- NVD (NIST)vuln/detail/CVE-2026-91769web
Changes to this CVE
Who changed this CVE and when: NVD (analysis, affected products, CVSS), the CVE publisher (CNA) and additional providers such as CISA (ADP).
Initial analysis by NVDNVD
Newly listed as affected:- PHP (8.2.0 – before 8.2.34; 8.3.0 – before 8.3.35; 8.4.0 – before 8.4.26; 8.5.0 – before 8.5.11)
Show 2 original changes
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After Product configuration added —OR *cpe:2.3:a:php:php:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 8.2.0 up to (excluding) 8.2.34 *cpe:2.3:a:php:php:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 8.3.0 up to (excluding) 8.3.35 *cpe:2.3:a:php:php:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 8.4.0 up to (excluding) 8.4.26 *cpe:2.3:a:php:php:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 8.5.0 up to (excluding) 8.5.11Reference type added —PHP Group: https://github.com/php/php-src/security/advisories/GHSA-vvx9-73fr-5jjx Types: Exploit, Vendor AdvisorySource identifier: nvd@nist.gov
Record modifiedCISA ADP
CISA assessment (SSVC): exploitation: none known, automatable: no
Show the original change
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After SSVC assessment added —{"id":"CVE-2026-91769","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"no"},{"technicalImpact":"partial"}],"version":"2.0.3","timestamp":"2026-09-28T12:56:47.310384Z"}Source identifier: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
ReceivedPHP
CVSS V3.1: AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Weakness type: CWE-297
Description added or changed
Show 5 original changes
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After Description added —PHP's OpenSSL stream peer verification checks the certificate's subjectAltName entries first and, whenever no entry matches, falls back to the Common Name. RFC 6125 requires the CN to be ignored once the certificate presents any service identity, so a certificate carrying a non-matching DNS SAN was still accepted when its CN matched the requested peer_name. A certificate trusted by the client for one name can therefore be used to impersonate another.CVSS added —AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:NWeakness type (CWE) added —CWE-297Affected versions (publisher) added —New affected value received. <a href="https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/blob/main/cves/2026/91xxx/CVE-2026-91769.json">CVE-2026-91769</a>Reference added —https://github.com/php/php-src/security/advisories/GHSA-vvx9-73fr-5jjxSource identifier: security@php.net
Embed badge
Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.
<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-91769"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-91769.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-91769 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>