CVE-2025-32989
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA heap-buffer-overread vulnerability was found in GnuTLS in how it handles the Certificate Transparency (CT) Signed Certificate Timestamp (SCT) extension during X.509 certificate parsing. This flaw allows a malicious user to create a certificate containing a malformed SCT extension (OID 1.3.6.1.4.1.11129.2.4.2) that contains sensitive data. This issue leads to the exposure of confidential information when GnuTLS verifies certificates from certain websites when the certificate (SCT) is not checked correctly.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceA heap-buffer-overread vulnerability exists in GnuTLS during X.509 certificate parsing when handling the Certificate Transparency Signed Certificate Timestamp (SCT) extension (OID 1.3.6.1.4.1.11129.2.4.2). A malicious certificate with a malformed SCT extension can cause GnuTLS to read beyond allocated buffer boundaries, potentially exposing sensitive memory contents during certificate verification.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 4.0= 6.0= 7.0= 8.0= 9.0= 10.0all versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed GnuTLS versionRun `gnutls-cli --version` or check the library file version (e.g., `rpm -q gnutls` on RHEL systems, or `dpkg -l libgnutls*` on Debian-based systems)Affected if The installed version falls within the affected ranges or is an unpatched version of GnuTLS (all versions are listed as affected)
-
Verify if applications use GnuTLS for certificate handlingCheck which applications are linked against GnuTLS using `ldd <application_binary>` or review application documentation to confirm it uses GnuTLS for X.509 certificate verificationAffected if The application uses GnuTLS for TLS/certificate operations and processes X.509 certificates
-
Determine if certificate verification with SCT extension processing is enabledReview application configuration for Certificate Transparency / SCT validation settings. Check if the application processes certificates containing the SCT extension (OID 1.3.6.1.4.1.11129.2.4.2). For custom applications, inspect code or runtime logs for CT/SCT-related featuresAffected if Certificate verification is performed and SCT extensions are processed or parsed during X.509 certificate validation
-
Check for system exposure to external certificatesIdentify if the system accepts or verifies X.509 certificates from untrusted sources, particularly in scenarios where an attacker could supply a malicious certificate (e.g., TLS connections, client certificate authentication, custom certificate parsing)Affected if The system processes certificates from untrusted or potentially malicious sources without additional validation layers
-
Review Red Hat subsystem versions (for RHEL systems)Check OpenShift Container Platform version with `oc version` or RHEL version with `cat /etc/redhat-release`. For RHEL, also verify gnutls-related packages with `rpm -qa | grep gnutls`Affected if Running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, or 10.0, or OpenShift Container Platform 4.0, with GnuTLS handling certificates
You are affected if your system runs any version of GnuTLS that processes X.509 certificates containing SCT extensions (OID 1.3.6.1.4.1.11129.2.4.2) without the patched fix applied.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpdate GnuTLS to the latest patched version that addresses this vulnerability. Ensure certificate verification properly validates SCT extensions and test with certificates containing malformed SCT data.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-32989 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-32989 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data