GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc: Rustls TLS 1.3 Handshake Messages Incorrectly Vulnerability

MODERATE
CVSS 5.3
Published
Advisory Summary

GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc is a MODERATE (CVSS 5.3) tls 1.3 handshake messages incorrectly vulnerability (General Security Weakness) affecting Rustls libraries in the crates.io ecosystem. The issue involves tls 1.3 handshake messages incorrectly accepted across encryption level boundaries. Remediation is available by upgrading affected packages to version 0.23.45.

GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc at a Glance

CVE Identifier N/A
GHSA Identifier GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc
Severity MODERATE
CVSS v3.1 Base Score 5.3
CWE Classification General Security Weakness
Affected Product Rustls
Package Ecosystem crates.io
Published Date
Last Updated

Security Impact

CVSS: 5.3

The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N).

Attack Vector Network (AV:N)
Attack Complexity Low (AC:L)
Privileges Required None (PR:N)
User Interaction None (UI:N)
Scope Unchanged (S:U)
Confidentiality Low (C:L)
Integrity None (I:N)
Availability None (A:N)

How to Fix GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc

To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected Rustls dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.

rustls fixed: 0.23.45
Upgrade rustls to 0.23.45
Verify Direct and Transitive Dependencies

Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:

inspect dependencies for rustls

How to Check if You Are Affected

To determine whether your application is affected by GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc, inspect your project dependencies for Rustls:

inspect dependencies for rustls

Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of Rustls in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than 0.23.45), your application is affected.

Note: Verify declared build manifests and deployed runtime container environments.

Technical Details

Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis

This vulnerability is classified under General Security Weakness. In Rustls, software state validation or input boundaries are circumvented during processing. Review the official source advisory statement below for specific affected components, classes, and reproduction details.

Source Advisory Statement

Rustls accepted TLS 1.3 handshake messages sent at the wrong encryption level when they followed a key-changing message in the same record. 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 issue affects rustls versions 0.23.13 through 0.23.44 inclusive. # Original report ### Summary Rustls (tested version 0.23.44, and it appears still an issue on latest master though I have not tested this) accepts a TLS 1.3 server flight where a plaintext EncryptedExtensions is packed into the same record as the ServerHello. This is very similar to Go's CVE-2025-61730 fixed in https://github.com/golang/go/commit/5046bdf8a612b35a2c1a9e168054c1d5c65e7dd7 ### Details It appears `Deframer::aligned` considers itself aligned as long as all messages remaining in the buffer are complete. Rustls processes the ServerHello, installs the handshake keys, then pulls the complete (plaintext) EncryptedExtensions out of the buffer. This is insufficient per RFC 8446 section 5.1's > Handshake messages MUST NOT span key changes. Implementations MUST verify that all messages immediately preceding a key change align with a record boundary; if not, then they MUST terminate the connection with an "unexpected_message" alert. Because the ClientHello, EndOfEarlyData, ServerHello, Finished, and KeyUpdate messages can immediately precede a key change, implementations MUST send these messages in alignment with a record boundary. ### Impact An on path attacker can inject plaintext messages that are accepted. ### Tool Use Disclosure This was discovered by a new TLS/DTLS test suite currently under construction. The specific testcase was inspired by the Go CVE. Other tested implementations (Botan, OpenSSL, BoringSSL, Go, wolfSSL) reject this protocol flow. Daybreak Blue reviewed the rustls code to identify probable root cause.

GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc Affected Rustls Versions

1 component(s)
Fixed Versions:
0.23.45
Product / Package Ecosystem Affected Versions Fixed Version
rustls
crates.io
≥ 0.23.13
< 0.23.45
0.23.45

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc?
GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc is a security vulnerability in Rustls involving TLS 1.3 handshake messages incorrectly accepted across encryption level boundaries under General Security Weakness.
Which Rustls versions are affected?
Affected versions include releases prior to 0.23.45 across affected packages: rustls.
What version fixes GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc?
Upgrading to 0.23.45 (or the latest patched release for your respective branch) resolves the vulnerability.
Is rustls affected?
Yes, rustls is affected in releases prior to 0.23.45. Upgrade your dependency to 0.23.45 or later.
What is the CVSS score of GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc?
GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.3 (MODERATE) with vector string CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N.
What CWE is associated with GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc?
GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc is classified under General Security Weakness.
How can I check crates.io dependencies for GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc?
Run the dependency tree command: 'inspect dependencies for rustls'. This command lists direct and transitive dependencies in your build configuration so you can verify if a vulnerable version is resolved.
Machine-readable OSV JSON OSV v1.5 Schema
Normalized schema output
{
  "schema_version" : "1.4.0",
  "id" : "GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc",
  "modified" : "2026-10-05T23:30:17Z",
  "published" : "2026-10-05T23:30:17Z",
  "aliases" : [ ],
  "summary" : "Rustls: TLS 1.3 handshake messages incorrectly accepted across encryption level boundaries",
  "details" : "Rustls accepted TLS 1.3 handshake messages sent at the wrong encryption level when they followed a key-changing message in the same record. 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.\n\nThis issue affects rustls versions 0.23.13 through 0.23.44 inclusive.\n\n# Original report\n### Summary\nRustls (tested version 0.23.44, and it appears still an issue on latest master though I have not tested this) accepts a TLS 1.3 server flight where a plaintext EncryptedExtensions is packed into the same record as the ServerHello.\n\nThis is very similar to Go's CVE-2025-61730 fixed in https://github.com/golang/go/commit/5046bdf8a612b35a2c1a9e168054c1d5c65e7dd7\n\n### Details\nIt appears `Deframer::aligned` considers itself aligned as long as all messages remaining in the buffer are complete. Rustls processes the ServerHello, installs the handshake keys, then pulls the complete (plaintext) EncryptedExtensions out of the buffer.\n\nThis is insufficient per RFC 8446 section 5.1's\n\n> Handshake messages MUST NOT span key changes.  Implementations MUST verify that all messages immediately preceding a key change align with a record boundary; if not, then they MUST terminate the connection with an \"unexpected_message\" alert.  Because the ClientHello, EndOfEarlyData, ServerHello, Finished, and KeyUpdate messages can immediately precede a key change, implementations MUST send these messages in alignment with a record boundary.\n\n### Impact\nAn on path attacker can inject plaintext messages that are accepted.\n\n### Tool Use Disclosure\nThis was discovered by a new TLS/DTLS test suite currently under construction. The specific testcase was inspired by the Go CVE. Other tested implementations (Botan, OpenSSL, BoringSSL, Go, wolfSSL) reject this protocol flow. Daybreak Blue reviewed the rustls code to identify probable root cause.",
  "severity" : [ {
    "type" : "CVSS_V3",
    "score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N"
  } ],
  "affected" : [ {
    "package" : {
      "ecosystem" : "crates.io",
      "name" : "rustls"
    },
    "ranges" : [ {
      "type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
      "events" : [ {
        "introduced" : "0.23.13"
      }, {
        "fixed" : "0.23.45"
      } ]
    } ]
  } ],
  "references" : [ {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/rustls/rustls/security/advisories/GHSA-2mjx-qc3c-rqvc"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/golang/go/commit/5046bdf8a612b35a2c1a9e168054c1d5c65e7dd7"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/rustls/rustls/commit/98456aea708a7e3c6151e00ca2d4428e7a58257a"
  }, {
    "type" : "PACKAGE",
    "url" : "https://github.com/rustls/rustls"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0285.html"
  } ],
  "database_specific" : {
    "cwe_ids" : [ ],
    "severity" : "MODERATE",
    "github_reviewed" : true,
    "github_reviewed_at" : "2026-10-05T23:30:17Z",
    "nvd_published_at" : null
  }
}