CVE-2026-19553

SSLContext.wrap_bio() missing validation of server_hostname parameter

HIGH
7.6
CVSS Score
Published: September 30, 2026 at 04:17 PM UTC
Updated: October 16, 2026 at 07:17 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorPython

Using CPython by Python Software Foundation?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect CPython - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH7.6
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.5%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

ssl.SSLContext.wrap_bio() didn't require the server_hostname argument to not be None if ssl.SSLContext.check_hostname was set. Due to a missing parameter check in SSLObject, if the server_hostname argument isn't supplied then hostname verification would be silently skipped. This defect could lead to programs where certificate hostname verification *appeared* to be succeeding with SSLContext.check_hostname = True and no ValueError being raised due to misconfiguration. If the program passes a server_hostname value that isn't an empty string or None to any of these APIs then certificate hostname verification proceeds as expected and the program is not affected by this vulnerability. Mitigating this vulnerability doesn't require updating Python or applying the patch. To mitigate, pass a valid non-None and non-empty server_hostname value to SSLContext.wrap_bio(), asyncio.create_connection(), or asyncio.loop.start_tls() and certificate hostname verification will proceed as expected. Upgrading to the latest version of Python or applying the patch only changes the behavior from silently skipping hostname verification to raising a ValueError, similar to SSLContext.wrap_socket(), when server_hostname isn't supplied.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

Affected range stops below 3.10.22, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.11.17, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.12.15, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.13.16, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.14.8, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.15.0rc3, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatableTotal impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

7.6HIGHPSF
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusAWAITING ANALYSIS
CWE
CWE-297

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card