CVE-2026-40243

mediumpriority · track · 19EPSS 0.002 · 7 %ileEURUUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.17% (7th) EPSS
CVSS 4.8 · medium
Is it mine?
9 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
5 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · osv

EPSS · scored 2026-10-28

Incus is a system container and virtual machine manager. In versions before 7.0.0, broken TLS validation logic in the OVN database connection logic can allow connections to an attacker's OVN database. The OVN client implementations disable Go standard TLS server verification and replace it with custom peer-certificate verification logic. That replacement verifier does not anchor trust in the configured CA certificate. Instead, it constructs the verification root set from certificates supplied by the peer during the handshake, so the configured CA is parsed but not used as the trust anchor for the final verification decision. In OVN-enabled deployments that use these SSL database connection paths, an attacker able to impersonate or intercept the OVN endpoint on the management network can present a rogue self-signed certificate chain, and Incus will accept this certificate as valid. This issue defeats the intended CA-based trust model for OVN database connections and permits endpoint impersonation by an active attacker in a suitable network position. This issue is fixed in version 7.0.0.

01

cvss

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

4.8
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · low–medium · 0.6–4.8

v3.14.8mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:Nprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 2.2 · impact 2.5
v3.14.8mediumAV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:Nsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU
v3.12.3lowCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:Nsecondary · OSV
v4.02.3lowCVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v4.02.3lowCVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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:Xsecondary · security-advisories@github.com
v4.00.6lowCVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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:Xsecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

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

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (9)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (2)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-c839-4qxr-j4x3Incus has an OVN TLS Verification that Accepts Peer-Supplied Roots2026-05-04ghsa · osvUS

    ### Summary Broken TLS validation logic in the OVN database connection logic could allow connections to an attacker's OVN database. OVN uses mTLS for authentication, so the attacker cannot actually perform a full man in the middle attack as they won't be able to authenticated with the real OVN deployment. At best they can provide a replacement empty database which Incus will briefly interact with before hitting errors due to the rest of the OVN stack not reacting to the committed changes. Also worth noting that the OVN control plane is typically run on the same servers that run Incus, there is typically no routing involved between an Incus server and the OVN control plane, making such an attack extremely difficult to pull off in the first place. ### Details The OVN client implementations within Incus disable Go standard TLS server verification (InsecureSkipVerify: true) and replace it with custom peer-certificate verification logic. That replacement verifier does not anchor trust in the configured CA certificate. Instead, it constructs the verification root set from certificates supplied by the peer during the handshake. As a result, the configured CA is parsed but not used as the trust anchor for the final verification decision. Although a configured CA certificate (tlsCAcert) is parsed and added to a client CA pool, that pool is not used during the final verification decision. Instead, the callback creates a fresh roots pool from the raw certificates received over the wire and verifies the presented leaf certificate against those attacker-influenced roots. No endpoint identity validation is visible in the provided verification logic. In OVN-enabled Incus deployments that use these SSL database connection paths, this affects authenticated connections from Incus to the OVN northbound and southbound databases. Incus documents clustered OVN deployments in which the OVN distributed database runs across multiple servers, and upstream OVN documentation describes the northbound database as the interface used by the cloud management system and the southbound database as the central coordination point for logical and physical network state. Because the custom verifier accepts peer-supplied trust anchors, an attacker able to impersonate or intercept the OVN endpoint on the management network can present a rogue self-signed certificate chain. Incus will accept this certificate as valid, collapsing the configured CA-based trust model. Because Incus exposes dedicated OVN TLS settings for a CA certificate, client certificate, and client key, the implementation clearly intends to authenticate OVN database connections using operator-supplied trust material rather than peer-supplied certificates. By abandoning the configured CA pool and instead trusting peer-supplied roots, the implementation defeats the intended authentication boundary on OVN database connections and permits endpoint impersonation by an active attacker able to intercept or stand in for the OVN database service. In clustered OVN-backed Incus deployments, this flaw reduces CA-anchored authentication of OVN database connections to endpoint impersonation for an attacker with a suitable position on the management or control-plane network. This is especially significant because OVN northbound and southbound databases are the authoritative control-plane interfaces for logical network configuration, translation, and distribution to hypervisors and gateways. As a result, the issue is best understood as a control-plane authentication failure with potentially broad networking impact, not merely as generic TLS misconfiguration. Affected Files: https://github.com/lxc/incus/blob/v6.22.0/internal/server/network/ovn/ovn_nb.go https://github.com/lxc/incus/blob/v6.22.0/internal/server/network/ovn/ovn_sb.go https://github.com/lxc/incus/blob/v6.22.0/internal/server/network/ovn/ovn_icnb.go https://github.com/lxc/incus/blob/v6.22.0/internal/server/network/ovn/ovn_icsb.go Affected Code: ``` func NewNB(dbAddr string, sslCACert string, sslClientCert string, sslClientKey string) (*NB, error) { [...] if strings.Contains(dbAddr, "ssl:") { [...] tlsConfig := &tls.Config{ Certificates: []tls.Certificate{clientCert}, InsecureSkipVerify: true, } if sslCACert != "" { [...] tlsCAcert, err := x509.ParseCertificate(tlsCAder.Bytes) if err != nil { return nil, err } tlsCAcert.IsCA = true tlsCAcert.KeyUsage = x509.KeyUsageCertSign clientCAPool := x509.NewCertPool() clientCAPool.AddCert(tlsCAcert) tlsConfig.VerifyPeerCertificate = func(rawCerts [][]byte, chains [][]*x509.Certificate) error { if len(rawCerts) < 1 { return errors.New("Missing server certificate") } roots := x509.NewCertPool() for _, rawCert := range rawCerts { cert, _ := x509.ParseCertificate(rawCert) if cert != nil { roots.AddCert(cert) } } cert, _ := x509.ParseCertificate(rawCerts[0]) if cert == nil { return errors.New("Bad server certificate") } opts := x509.VerifyOptions{ Roots: roots, } _, err := cert.Verify(opts) return err } } options = append(options, ovsdbClient.WithTLSConfig(tlsConfig)) } [...] } ``` The same verification pattern is duplicated in the other affected files listed above. Verification-Logic Proof of Concept Because the vulnerability resides entirely in the certificate-verification logic, it can be demonstrated in isolation without a live interception lab. The following Go harness reproduces the effective OVN client verification logic, generates a rogue self-signed certificate, and demonstrates that the implemented trust decision accepts peer-supplied roots instead of the configured CA pool. Commands: ``` cat <<'EOF' > poc_ovn_tls_roots.go package main import ( "crypto/ed25519" "crypto/rand" "crypto/x509" "crypto/x509/pkix" "fmt" "math/big" "time" ) func main() { pub, priv, _ := ed25519.GenerateKey(rand.Reader) template := x509.Certificate{ SerialNumber: big.NewInt(1), Subject: pkix.Name{ Organization: []string{"Attacker Corp MITM"}, }, NotBefore: time.Now(), NotAfter: time.Now().Add(time.Hour), KeyUsage: x509.KeyUsageDigitalSignature | x509.KeyUsageCertSign, ExtKeyUsage: []x509.ExtKeyUsage{x509.ExtKeyUsageServerAuth}, BasicConstraintsValid: true, IsCA: true, } rogueCertBytes, _ := x509.CreateCertificate(rand.Reader, &template, &template, pub, priv) verifyPeerCertificate := func(rawCerts [][]byte) error { if len(rawCerts) < 1 { return fmt.Errorf("missing server certificate") } roots := x509.NewCertPool() for _, rawCert := range rawCerts { cert, _ := x509.ParseCertificate(rawCert) if cert != nil { roots.AddCert(cert) } } cert, _ := x509.ParseCertificate(rawCerts[0]) if cert == nil { return fmt.Errorf("bad server certificate") } opts := x509.VerifyOptions{ Roots: roots, } _, err := cert.Verify(opts) return err } err := verifyPeerCertificate([][]byte{rogueCertBytes}) if err == nil { fmt.Println("[!] VULNERABLE: The reproduced OVN client verification logic accepted the rogue attacker certificate.") } else { fmt.Printf("Safe: Rejected with error: %v\n", err) } } EOF go run poc_ovn_tls_roots.go ``` Result: ``` [!] VULNERABLE: The reproduced OVN client verification logic accepted the rogue attacker certificate. ``` It is recommended to verify peer certificates against the configured CA pool rather than against roots synthesized from untrusted peer input. The safest fix is to remove the custom VerifyPeerCertificate logic and rely on Go standard TLS verification with tls.Config.RootCAs set to the configured CA pool and, where applicable, ServerName set appropriately for identity validation. ### Credit This issue was discovered and reported by the team at 7asecurity (https://7asecurity.com/)

  • GO-2026-5319Incus has an OVN TLS Verification that Accepts Peer-Supplied Roots in github.com/lxc/incus2026-06-25vendor · osvUS

    Incus has an OVN TLS Verification that Accepts Peer-Supplied Roots in github.com/lxc/incus

06

also known as (6)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2026-05-06modified 2026-10-26
08

references (12)

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