Improper access control in GitLab EE versions 13.11.6, 13.12.6, and 14.0.2 allows users to be created via single sign on despite user cap being enabled

Improper validation of invited users' email address in GitLab EE affecting all versions since 12.2 allowed projects to add members with email address domain that should be blocked by group settings

Missing access control in all GitLab versions starting from 13.12 before 14.0.9, all versions starting from 14.1 before 14.1.4, and all versions starting from 14.2 before 14.2.2 with Jira Cloud integration enabled allows Jira users without administrative privileges to add and remove Jira Connect Namespaces via the GitLab.com for Jira Cloud application configuration page

GitLab 9.4.x before 9.4.2 does not support LDAP SSL certificate verification, but a verify_certificates LDAP option was mentioned in the 9.4 release announcement. This issue occurred because code was not merged. This is related to use of the omniauth-ldap library and the gitlab_omniauth-ldap gem.

An improper certificate validation issue in Smartcard authentication in GitLab EE affecting all versions from 11.6 prior to 16.4.4, 16.5 prior to 16.5.4, and 16.6 prior to 16.6.2 allows an attacker to authenticate as another user given their public key if they use Smartcard authentication. Smartcard authentication is an experimental feature and has to be manually enabled by an administrator.

An issue has been discovered affecting GitLab versions prior to 14.4.5, between 14.5.0 and 14.5.3, and between 14.6.0 and 14.6.1. GitLab does not validate SSL certificates for some of external CI services which makes it possible to perform MitM attacks on connections to these external services.

Starting with version 13.7 the Gitlab CE/EE editions were affected by a security issue related to the validation of the certificates for the Fortinet OTP that could result in authentication issues.

curl before 7.53.0 has an incorrect TLS Certificate Status Request extension feature that asks for a fresh proof of the server's certificate's validity in the code that checks for a test success or failure. It ends up always thinking there's valid proof, even when there is none or if the server doesn't support the TLS extension in question. This could lead to users not detecting when a server's certificate goes invalid or otherwise be mislead that the server is in a better shape than it is in reality. This flaw also exists in the command line tool (--cert-status).

An issue exists in PrimeKey EJBCA before 7.4.3 when enrolling with EST while proxied through an RA over the Peers protocol. As a part of EJBCA's domain security model, the peer connector allows the restriction of client certificates (for the RA, not the end user) to a limited set of allowed CAs, thus restricting the accessibility of that RA to the rights it has within a specific role. While this works for other protocols such as CMP, it was found that the EJBCA enrollment over an EST implementation bypasses this check, allowing enrollment with a valid client certificate through any functioning and authenticated RA connected to the CA. NOTE: an attacker must already have a trusted client certificate and authorization to enroll against the targeted CA.

The certificate used to identify the Silver Peak Cloud Portal to EdgeConnect devices is not validated. This makes it possible for someone to establish a TLS connection from EdgeConnect to an untrusted portal.

An authentication bypass flaw was found in the way krb5's certauth interface before 1.16.1 handled the validation of client certificates. A remote attacker able to communicate with the KDC could potentially use this flaw to impersonate arbitrary principals under rare and erroneous circumstances.

Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. In affected versions Envoy does not restrict the set of certificates it accepts from the peer, either as a TLS client or a TLS server, to only those certificates that contain the necessary extendedKeyUsage (id-kp-serverAuth and id-kp-clientAuth, respectively). This means that a peer may present an e-mail certificate (e.g. id-kp-emailProtection), either as a leaf certificate or as a CA in the chain, and it will be accepted for TLS. This is particularly bad when combined with the issue described in pull request #630, in that it allows a Web PKI CA that is intended only for use with S/MIME, and thus exempted from audit or supervision, to issue TLS certificates that will be accepted by Envoy. As a result Envoy will trust upstream certificates that should not be trusted. There are no known workarounds to this issue. Users are advised to upgrade.

An issue was discovered in Mattermost Server before 3.7.3 and 3.6.5. A System Administrator can place a SAML certificate at an arbitrary pathname.

The certificate used to identify Orchestrator to EdgeConnect devices is not validated, which makes it possible for someone to establish a TLS connection from EdgeConnect to an untrusted Orchestrator.

Entrust Entelligence Security Provider (ESP) before 10.0.60 on Windows mishandles errors during SSL Certificate Validation, leading to situations where (for example) a user continues to interact with a web site that has an invalid certificate chain.

Wire is a collaboration platform. wire-ios-transport handles authentication of requests, network failures, and retries for the iOS implementation of Wire. In the 3.82 version of the iOS application, a new web socket implementation was introduced for users running iOS 13 or higher. This new websocket implementation is not configured to enforce certificate pinning when available. Certificate pinning for the new websocket is enforced in version 3.84 or above.