Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2026-33697· NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

CoCoS attested TLS is vulnerable to relay attacks via extracted ephemeral TLS keys

Cocos AI is a confidential computing system for AI. The current implementation of attested TLS (aTLS) in CoCoS is vulnerable to a relay attack affecting all versions from v0.4.0 through v0.8.2. This vulnerability is present in both the AMD SEV-SNP and Intel TDX deployment targets supported by CoCoS. In the affected design, an attacker may be able to extract the ephemeral TLS private key used during the intra-handshake attestation. Because the attestation evidence is bound to the ephemeral key but not to the TLS channel, possession of that key is sufficient to relay or divert the attested TLS session. A client will accept the connection under false assumptions about the endpoint it is communicating with — the attestation report cannot distinguish the genuine attested service from the attacker's relay. This undermines the intended authentication guarantees of attested TLS. A successful attack may allow an attacker to impersonate an attested CoCoS service and access data or operations that the client intended to send only to the genuine attested endpoint. Exploitation requires the attacker to first extract the ephemeral TLS private key, which is possible through physical access to the server hardware, transient execution attacks, or side-channel attacks. Note that the aTLS implementation was fully redesigned in v0.7.0, but the redesign does not address this vulnerability. The relay attack weakness is architectural and affects all releases in the v0.4.0–v0.8.2 range. This vulnerability class was formally analyzed and demonstrated across multiple attested TLS implementations, including CoCoS, by researchers whose findings were disclosed to the IETF TLS Working Group. Formal verification was conducted using ProVerif. As of time of publication, there is no patch available. No complete workaround is available. The following hardening measures reduce but do not eliminate the risk: Keep TEE firmware and microcode up to date to reduce the key-extraction surface; define strict attestation policies that validate all available report fields, including firmware versions, TCB levels, and platform configuration registers; and/or enable mutual aTLS with CA-signed certificates where deployment architecture permits.

MediumCVSS 6.3 · v3.1—Proof of concept No fix recorded
Published
Mar 26, 2026
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
0.1% · 0th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

25

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
25 / 40 · 6.3 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.1%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
6.3
CNA · GitHub_M
7.5
1.2 point gap

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

VendorProduct
ultravioletcocos ai

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • ultraviolet cocos ai0.4.0 and later · before 0.9.0

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • ultravioletrs cocos

    • >= 0.4.0, < 0.8.2affected

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

Proof of concept available

A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.

Evidence

  • Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub ×1

Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.

Public exploit evidence
SourceKindDate
Proof-of-concept repository on GitHubstars:02026-07-21

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

  1. Published
  2. First PoC+116 d
  3. TodaySep 30, 2026+188 d
EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
  • A low-privileged account is enough.
  • No user action is required.
  • Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
none
Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
High
Availability impact
None

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

nvd-primary

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records