Skip to content

sigstore's `certificateOIDs` verification constraints are silently dropped and never enforced

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 27, 2026 in sigstore/sigstore-js • Updated Jul 1, 2026

Package

npm sigstore (npm)

Affected versions

<= 4.1.0

Patched versions

4.1.1

Description

Summary

The documented certificateOIDs option in sigstore.verify() is accepted by the public API but discarded before verification, so required certificate extension OIDs are never checked.

Details

The public verify options include certificateOIDs and the documentation says those OID/value pairs “must be present in the certificate’s extension list.” The policy-construction path used by sigstore.verify() and createVerifier() only copies the SAN and issuer settings into the verification policy and completely ignores certificateOIDs.

As a result, callers can believe they are constraining verification to certificates carrying specific Fulcio or workload-identifying OIDs, while the actual verifier never receives those constraints. Any bundle that satisfies the remaining checks is accepted even if the required OID extensions are absent or mismatched.

This is reachable from supported usage through the documented certificateOIDs verify option.

PoC

const { createVerificationPolicy } = require("sigstore/dist/config");

const policy = createVerificationPolicy({
  certificateIssuer: "https://issuer.example",
  certificateIdentityEmail: "victim@example.com",
  certificateOIDs: {
    "1.2.3.4": "required-value",
  },
});

console.log("certificateOIDs" in policy, JSON.stringify(policy));
// false {"subjectAlternativeName":"victim@example.com","extensions":{"issuer":"https://issuer.example"}}

Impact

Applications that rely on certificateOIDs to restrict which certificates may sign artifacts receive no such protection. Unauthorized certificates that should be rejected on extension policy can be accepted as long as they satisfy the remaining verification checks.

References

@bdehamer bdehamer published to sigstore/sigstore-js May 27, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 1, 2026
Reviewed Jul 1, 2026
Last updated Jul 1, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(9th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-48815

GHSA ID

GHSA-52v5-jr5w-gjxr

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.