Skip to content

RUSTSEC-2026-0285: TLS 1.3 handshake messages incorrectly accepted across encryption level boundaries #3222

Open

Description

@github-actions

TLS 1.3 handshake messages incorrectly accepted across encryption level boundaries

Details
Package rustls
Version 0.23.41
URL GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc
Date 2026-09-14
Patched versions >=0.23.45
Unaffected versions <0.23.13

Rustls accepted TLS 1.3 handshake messages sent at the wrong encryption level
when they followed a key-changing message in the same record. For example,
a plaintext EncryptedExtensions message packed into the same record as the
ServerHello was accepted.

RFC 8446 section 5.1 requires that handshake messages do not span key changes,
and that implementations terminate the connection with an "unexpected_message"
alert if they do.

The handshake transcript is still authenticated, so a network-position attacker
cannot use this to alter or complete a handshake; the practical effect is that
a peer could send handshake messages that should be encrypted in plaintext
without rustls rejecting the connection.

This is functionally the same bug as Go's
GO-2026-4340 (CVE-2025-61730).

See advisory page for additional details.

Activity

  1. dannycjones commented on Sep 15, 2026

    @dannycjones
    Contributor

    Took a quick look at this in the context of the 0.11.0 RC2 vote (#3034) (which I've not yet sent out, just doing validations myself).

    0.11.0 RC2's Cargo.lock specifies 0.23.41 impacted by this issue, however this should not be relevant for published crates as the lock file is relevant for binary targets. Running a quick cargo update shows it resolving to 0.23.45. If anyone's downstream workspace targets an affected rustls version, tooling should flag it and it is resolved by performing a cargo update. Updating the Cargo lock file for the release would not help in any way.

    I think this does not impact 0.11.0 release candidate 2. Please let me know if you think otherwise.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions