CVE-2026-85088
No source can show you its own past. This one can.
Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.
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
rank 17 = 0 + 17 + 0 + 0 + 0
rank@v1 · backlog
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.00215 · without this subject the record ranks 17
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 6.9, from the CNA · without this subject the record ranks 0
It is getting worse, not staying still
FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed
no persisting rise in 365 days · without this subject the record ranks 17
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
0 products in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 17
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 17
Hindsight · the state
Foresight · where to check next
This record is one instance of CWE-295, improper certificate validation. The index holds 1669 prior instances of this class, 6 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. taxonomy@v1
Running Apache Thrift? Check your version
A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.
Watch this record
Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.
Set up a watchlist (free with an account: one stack of three products)
Record your call
Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.
Or open an investigation: an incident or a near miss on this CVE, kept with its evidence where anyone in your organisation can find it.
Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.
Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.
Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness
Written for the ticket you're about to file.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
Show full BOD 26-04 deadline
CISA has not scored it, so the directive's own defaults apply: automatable no, technical impact total. Calendar days from the KEV listing or from when you find it on a system, whichever is first. Federal agencies are bound from 7 Dec 2026, and contracts often carry it to suppliers. The directive and its table
Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score
Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.
- RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
- RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
- RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
- RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known
A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.
$9,460 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.8814887365328109 exposure x 0.00215 likelihood
udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run
$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.
What it is stated by the CNA
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. receipt
Read the rest of the CNA's description
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.
NVD's analysis a second authority
- weakness
- CWE-295; CWE-297
- also scored by
- security@apache.org 6.9 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:U/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
check it yourself lists.apache.org lists.apache.org receipt
Movement
Only one observation of this value is held, so there is no movement to show yet.
The full biography
The record had been public for 1 day when this index was last written.
The pattern, elsewhere
This record is one instance of CWE-295, improper certificate validation. The index holds 1669 prior instances of this class, 6 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. cwe-consequences@4.20
"Matches n of m" counts the attributes the two records can both be compared on: the CVSS metrics they share a version of, any weakness class beyond this one, and the vendor. fit-rules@v1
1669 records in this class held. The six above are drawn from the ones CISA has listed as exploited, ranked by how much of the record matches this one. That is why every one of them is KEV-listed: the pool is, so the colour on those spokes says nothing the pool has not already said.
No curated product neighbourhood is held for this product, so the records above are the nearest this index can name. The neighbourhood table covers a small set of products and is extended by hand.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
None. No alias set, and nothing in the corpus cites this identifier or shares its product family within 60 days.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2026-85088.
What usually comes next
Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.