Update dependency cryptography to v46.0.7 [SECURITY]

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Update	Change	OpenSSF
cryptography (changelog)	patch	==46.0.5 → ==46.0.7

GitHub Vulnerability Alerts

CVE-2026-34073

Summary

In versions of cryptography prior to 46.0.5, DNS name constraints were only validated against SANs within child certificates, and not the "peer name" presented during each validation. Consequently, cryptography would allow a peer named bar.example.com to validate against a wildcard leaf certificate for *.example.com, even if the leaf's parent certificate (or upwards) contained an excluded subtree constraint for bar.example.com.

This behavior resulted from a gap between RFC 5280 (which defines Name Constraint semantics) and RFC 9525 (which defines service identity semantics): put together, neither states definitively whether Name Constraints should be applied to peer names. To close this gap, cryptography now conservatively rejects any validation where the peer name would be rejected by a name constraint if it were a SAN instead.

In practice, exploitation of this bypass requires an uncommon X.509 topology, one that the Web PKI avoids because it exhibits these kinds of problems. Consequently, we consider this a medium-to-low impact severity.

See CVE-2025-61727 for a similar bypass in Go's crypto/x509.

Remediation

Users should upgrade to 46.0.6 or newer.

Attribution

Reporter: @​1seal

CVE-2026-39892

If a non-contiguous buffer was passed to APIs which accepted Python buffers (e.g. Hash.update()), this could lead to buffer overflows. For example:

h = Hash(SHA256())
b.update(buf[::-1])

would read past the end of the buffer on Python >3.11

---

cryptography has incomplete DNS name constraint enforcement on peer names

CVE-2026-34073 / GHSA-m959-cc7f-wv43

More information

Details

Summary

In versions of cryptography prior to 46.0.5, DNS name constraints were only validated against SANs within child certificates, and not the "peer name" presented during each validation. Consequently, cryptography would allow a peer named bar.example.com to validate against a wildcard leaf certificate for *.example.com, even if the leaf's parent certificate (or upwards) contained an excluded subtree constraint for bar.example.com.

This behavior resulted from a gap between RFC 5280 (which defines Name Constraint semantics) and RFC 9525 (which defines service identity semantics): put together, neither states definitively whether Name Constraints should be applied to peer names. To close this gap, cryptography now conservatively rejects any validation where the peer name would be rejected by a name constraint if it were a SAN instead.

In practice, exploitation of this bypass requires an uncommon X.509 topology, one that the Web PKI avoids because it exhibits these kinds of problems. Consequently, we consider this a medium-to-low impact severity.

See CVE-2025-61727 for a similar bypass in Go's crypto/x509.

Remediation

Users should upgrade to 46.0.6 or newer.

Attribution

Reporter: @​1seal

Severity

• CVSS Score: 1.7 / 10 (Low)
• Vector String: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U

References

• https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/security/advisories/GHSA-m959-cc7f-wv43
• https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-34073
• https://github.com/pyca/cryptography

This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).

---

Cryptography vulnerable to buffer overflow if non-contiguous buffers were passed to APIs

CVE-2026-39892 / GHSA-p423-j2cm-9vmq

More information

Details

If a non-contiguous buffer was passed to APIs which accepted Python buffers (e.g. Hash.update()), this could lead to buffer overflows. For example:

h = Hash(SHA256())
b.update(buf[::-1])

would read past the end of the buffer on Python >3.11

Severity

• CVSS Score: 6.9 / 10 (Medium)
• Vector String: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

References

• https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/security/advisories/GHSA-p423-j2cm-9vmq
• https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-39892
• https://github.com/pyca/cryptography
• http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/04/08/12

This data is provided by OSV and the GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY 4.0).

---

Release Notes

pyca/cryptography (cryptography)

v46.0.7

Compare Source

v46.0.6

Compare Source

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

• Branch creation
  • ""
• Automerge
  • At any time (no schedule defined)

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.