CVE-2026-55962

Home/CVE/TLS 1.3 post-handshake authentication (PHA) issue where a server could accept a client's Finished message without the cl

CVE

↯ PDF report

TLS 1.3 post-handshake authentication (PHA) issue where a server could accept a client's Finished message without the cl

TLS 1.3 post-handshake authentication (PHA) issue where a server could accept a client's Finished message without the client having sent a Certificate and CertificateVerify. The post-handshake-auth exemption that allows an empty/absent peer certificate was only intended for the initial handshake, but it was also being applied while a post-handshake CertificateRequest was still outstanding. The check is now scoped to the initial handshake only: on the server, once a post-handshake CertificateRequest has been sent (certReqCtx is set), a peer certificate and a valid CertificateVerify are required again before the Finished is accepted, with empty-certificate handling following the configured verify mode (FAIL_IF_NO_PEER_CERT) just as during first-handshake client authentication.

Only affects TLS 1.3 servers built with post-handshake authentication support (WOLFSSL_POST_HANDSHAKE_AUTH / --enable-postauth, included in --enable-all) that enable WOLFSSL_VERIFY_POST_HANDSHAKE and request a client certificate after the handshake via wolfSSL_request_certificate(). Clients, and servers that do not use post-handshake authentication, are unaffected.

EPSS 0.00201

EPSS exploitation odds0.20% · top 89%

Monitor

⚠ NVD has not scored this CVE yet - manual triage required (common for recent CVEs)

No Sigma yet — build one → YARA rules0

Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots

NVD CVE.org CISA Exploit-DB GitHub PoC VulnCheck KEV GreyNoise

▸ How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch

This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-55962, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.

Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:

CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked. EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal. CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score. Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.

How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.

Then what - two workflows:

Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits. PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.

Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).

▣

Severity & exploitation scoring

EPSS exploitation probability

0.20%

Top 89%odds of exploitation in the next 30 days

CVSS metric silhouette

No structured CVSS vector for this CVE. Older entries often have only a numeric base score - the metric breakdown radar requires a full AV:_/AC:_/... vector string published by NVD.

SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment

Exploitation

none

Automatable

Tech impact

partial

Lifecycle

25 Jun 2026Published to NVD
26 Jun 2026Last modified

Every entry is a recorded date - NVD publish/modify, CISA KEV add, public exploit disclosure. No inferred events.

Attack path

Full kill chain

→

◆

ATT&CK techniques

Techniques this CVE enables. Pills with a solid outline are high confidence - named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei, or human-curated by CTID; the rest are inferred from the weakness type using MITRE's CVE Mapping Methodology and the CWE → CAPEC chain. Broad, generic-weakness guesses are filtered out. A small N× marks a technique that N independent sources agree on.

T1040 · Network Sniffing T1134 · Access Token Manipulation T1185 · Browser Session Hijacking T1505.003 · Web Shell T1548 · Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism T1550.001 · Application Access Token T1557 · Adversary-in-the-Middle T1563 · Remote Service Session Hijacking

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques