How severe is CVE-2026-93602?

No CVSS score has been assigned to CVE-2026-93602 yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by CVE-2026-93602?

CVE-2026-93602 affects the following packages: rustls-webpki (crates.io), rustls-webpki (crates.io). Ecosystems affected: crates.io.

How do I fix CVE-2026-93602?

Update rustls-webpki to 0.103.10 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-93602 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect CVE-2026-93602 in my crates.io dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for rustls-webpki, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate CVE-2026-93602 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Is CVE-2026-93602 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for CVE-2026-93602 yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for CVE-2026-93602?

CVE-2026-93602 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.2%, placing it in the 10th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is CVE-2026-93602?

CVE-2026-93602 is classified as CWE-299 (CWE-299). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was CVE-2026-93602 published, and has it been updated?

CVE-2026-93602 was published on September 18, 2026 and was last updated on November 4, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🦀 crates.io

Not in CISA KEV

CVE-2026-93602 — rustls-webpki

CVE-2026-93602 is a CWE-299 vulnerability in rustls-webpki. A fix is available for rustls-webpki — see the affected versions and patch details below.

rustls-webpki before 0.103.10 CRL Revocation Check Bypass

Also known asGHSA-pwjx-qhcg-rvj4RUSTSEC-2026-0049

Published

Sep 18, 2026

Updated

Nov 4, 2026

Affected

2 pkgs

Patched

2 / 2

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Nov 5, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-93602.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs10th percentile — riskier than 10% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

Real-World Exposure

2 pkgs affected

🦀rustls-webpki🦀rustls-webpki

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects crates.io packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

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 distributionPoints would be ignored.

The impact was that correct 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.

Affected Packages

2 total 2 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🦀crates.io	`rustls-webpki`	≥ 0.102.0-alpha.0&&< 0.103.10	0.103.10`cargo update -p rustls-webpki --precise 0.103.10`
🦀crates.io	`rustls-webpki`	≥ 0.104.0-alpha.1&&< 0.104.0-alpha.5	0.104.0-alpha.5`cargo update -p rustls-webpki --precise 0.104.0-alpha.5`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for rustls-webpki, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update rustls-webpki to 0.103.10 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-93602 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Frequently Asked Questions

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 correct 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

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-93602 in your dependencies?

Find it across crates.io, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works