CVE-2022-23649

lowpriority · track · 13EPSS 0.002 · 5 %ileEUUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.16% (5th) EPSS
CVSS 2.1 · low
Is it mine?
4 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
4 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · osv · nvd

EPSS · scored 2026-10-27

Cosign provides container signing, verification, and storage in an OCI registry for the sigstore project. Prior to version 1.5.2, Cosign can be manipulated to claim that an entry for a signature exists in the Rekor transparency log even if it doesn't. This requires the attacker to have pull and push permissions for the signature in OCI. This can happen with both standard signing with a keypair and "keyless signing" with Fulcio. If an attacker has access to the signature in OCI, they can manipulate cosign into believing the entry was stored in Rekor even though it wasn't. The vulnerability has been patched in v1.5.2 of Cosign. The `signature` in the `signedEntryTimestamp` provided by Rekor is now compared to the `signature` that is being verified. If these don't match, then an error is returned. If a valid bundle is copied to a different signature, verification should fail. Cosign output now only informs the user that certificates were verified if a certificate was in fact verified. There is currently no known workaround.

01

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

3.3
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode

v2.02.1lowAV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:Nprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 3.9 · impact 2.9
v3.13.3lowCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 1.8 · impact 1.4
v3.13.3lowCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.13.3lowCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 1.8 · impact 1.4
v3.13.3lowCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · OSV
v3.13.1lowCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Trackcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (4)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (3)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-ccxc-vr6p-4858Improper Certificate Validation in Cosign2022-02-22ghsa · osvUS

    ### Impact Cosign can be manipulated to claim that an entry for a signature exists in the Rekor transparency log even if it doesn't. This requires the attacker to have pull and push permissions for the signature in OCI. This can happen with both standard signing with a keypair and "keyless signing" with Fulcio. #### Signing with a keypair <details> To reproduce this vulnerability, create a keypair and sign an image. Don't store the signature in Rekor: ``` $ cosign generate-key-pair $ cosign sign --key cosign.key IMAGE ``` If an attacker has access to the signature in OCI, they can manipulate cosign into believing the entry was stored in Rekor even though it wasn't. To accomplish this, the attacker needs to: 1. Pull the signature image 2. Annotate the signature image with any valid Rekor bundle under the `dev.sigstore.cosign/bundle` annotation 3. Push the signature image back to OCI Verification then prints out the following: ``` $ cosign verify [--key] [IMAGE] Verification for [IMAGE] -- The following checks were performed on each of these signatures: - The cosign claims were validated - Existence of the claims in the transparency log was verified offline - The signatures were verified against the specified public key - Any certificates were verified against the Fulcio roots. […] ``` The claim that `Existence of the claims in the transparency log was verified offline` is inaccurate since an entry for this image doesn't exist in the log. The claim that `Any certificates were verified against the Fulcio roots.` is technically correct but since there were no certificates that should be explicitly called out. </details> #### "Keyless signing" with an OIDC flow <details> To reproduce this vulnerability, sign the image with a Fulcio identity. Don't store the signature in Rekor: ``` $ COSIGN_EXPERIMENTAL=1 cosign sign IMAGE [...] IMAGE appears to be a private repository, please confirm uploading to the transparency log at "https://rekor.sigstore.dev" [Y/N]: n ``` Then, create a keypair and sign the image again. Store an entry for the signature in Rekor: ``` $ cosign generate-key-pair $ COSIGN_EXPERIMENTAL=1 cosign sign --key cosign.key IMAGE Enter password for private key: IMAGE appears to be a private repository, please confirm uploading to the transparency log at "https://rekor.sigstore.dev" [Y/N]: y ``` If an attacker has access to the signature in OCI, they can manipulate cosign into believing the entry was stored in Rekor even though it wasn't. To accomplish this, the attacker needs to: 1. Pull the signature image 2. Copy the rekor bundle from the second signature into the first signature under the `dev.sigstore.cosign/bundle` annotation 3. Push the signature image back to OCI _Note: For this to work, both signatures must occur during the valid lifespan of the certificate (~20 minutes)._ Verification then prints out the following: ``` $ cosign verify [--key] [IMAGE] Verification for [IMAGE] -- The following checks were performed on each of these signatures: - The cosign claims were validated - Existence of the claims in the transparency log was verified offline - The signatures were verified against the specified public key - Any certificates were verified against the Fulcio roots. […] ``` The claim that `Existence of the claims in the transparency log was verified offline` is inaccurate since an entry for this image doesn't exist in the log. The claim that `Any certificates were verified against the Fulcio roots.` is technically correct but since there were no certificates that should be explicitly called out. </details> ### Patches The vulnerability has been patched in v1.5.2 of cosign. The `signature` in the `signedEntryTimestamp` provided by Rekor is now compared to the `signature` that is being verified. If these don't match, then an error is returned. If a valid bundle is copied to a different signature, verification should fail. Cosign output now only informs the user that certificates were verified if a certificate was in fact verified. ### Workarounds The only workaround is upgrading. ### For more information If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in [cosign](https://github.com/sigstore/cosign) * Send us a message on [Slack](https://sigstore.slack.com/). Invite link [here](https://join.slack.com/t/sigstore/shared_invite/zt-mhs55zh0-XmY3bcfWn4XEyMqUUutbUQ). ### Thank you Thank you to @mtrmac for finding and reporting this vulnerability. Thank you to everyone who worked on fixing this: * @nsmith5 * @znewman01 * @dlorenc * @mattmoor * @priyawadhwa

  • BIT-cosign-2022-23649Improper Certificate Validation in Cosign2024-03-06vendor · osvUS

    Cosign provides container signing, verification, and storage in an OCI registry for the sigstore project. Prior to version 1.5.2, Cosign can be manipulated to claim that an entry for a signature exists in the Rekor transparency log even if it doesn't. This requires the attacker to have pull and push permissions for the signature in OCI. This can happen with both standard signing with a keypair and "keyless signing" with Fulcio. If an attacker has access to the signature in OCI, they can manipulate cosign into believing the entry was stored in Rekor even though it wasn't. The vulnerability has been patched in v1.5.2 of Cosign. The `signature` in the `signedEntryTimestamp` provided by Rekor is now compared to the `signature` that is being verified. If these don't match, then an error is returned. If a valid bundle is copied to a different signature, verification should fail. Cosign output now only informs the user that certificates were verified if a certificate was in fact verified. There is currently no known workaround.

  • GO-2022-0326Improper certificate validation in github.com/sigstore/cosign2023-11-09vendor · osvUS

    Cosign can be manipulated to claim that an entry for a signature in the OCI registry exists in the Rekor transparency log even if it does not. This requires the attacker to have pull and push permissions for the signature in OCI. This can happen with both standard signing with a keypair and "keyless signing" with Fulcio certificate authority.

06

also known as (6)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2022-02-18modified 2026-06-17
08

references (7)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan