CRLs not considered authoritative by Distribution Point due to faulty matching logic

If a certificate had more than one `distributionPoint`, then only the first `distributionPoint` would be considered against each CRL's `IssuingDistributionPoint` `distributionPoint`, and then the certificate's subsequent `distributionPoint`s would be ignored. The impact was that correctly provided CRLs would not be consulted to check revocation. With `UnknownStatusPolicy::Deny` (the default) this would lead to incorrect but safe `Error::UnknownRevocationStatus`. With `UnknownStatusPolicy::Allow` this would lead to inappropriate acceptance of revoked certificates. This vulnerability is thought to be of limited impact. This is because both the certificate and CRL are signed -- an attacker would need to compromise a trusted issuing authority to trigger this bug. An attacker with such capabilities could likely bypass revocation checking through other more impactful means (such as publishing a valid, empty CRL.) More likely, this bug would be latent in normal use, and an attacker could leverage faulty revocation checking to continue using a revoked credential. This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-pwjx-qhcg-rvj4](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-pwjx-qhcg-rvj4). Thank you to [@1seal](https://github.com/1seal) for the report.

Source published

20 Mar 2026 12:00:00 UTC

Source modified

19 Sep 2026 08:42:27 UTC

Saved here

24 Oct 2026 13:19:54 UTC

Source terms

OSV · upstream source license applies

Original source record · Cite this exact observation · Complete original publisher JSON

Source: osv · OSV · upstream source license applies. The publisher's wording is preserved. ChangeIntel groups the information and labels changes. The JSON record includes additional source fields.