Skip to content

chore(deps): bump rustls-webpki and tokio-rustls#1037

Open
sl8vz wants to merge 1 commit into
bytebeamio:mainfrom
sl8vz:seb/deps
Open

chore(deps): bump rustls-webpki and tokio-rustls#1037
sl8vz wants to merge 1 commit into
bytebeamio:mainfrom
sl8vz:seb/deps

Conversation

@sl8vz
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@sl8vz sl8vz commented Mar 23, 2026

Due to recent vulnerabilities findings, minimal bump to allow lib users to bump necessary crates.

Signed-off-by: Sebastien Laveze <slaveze@smartandconnective.com>
@thehouseisonfire
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thank you for the issue, I have a fix out for this on my end.

@sl8vz
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

sl8vz commented Apr 1, 2026

@thehouseisonfire we're likely moving to your fork since current crate is not maintained

@kattassen
Copy link
Copy Markdown

kattassen commented Apr 15, 2026

Some more vulnerabilities found in rustls-webpki. Both of them fixed in 0.103.12 which suggest using this version rather than 0.103.10.

@bhormell
Copy link
Copy Markdown

bhormell commented May 4, 2026

+1 from a downstream consumer (Nodalix industrial automation platform — MQTT + Sparkplug B drivers).

Beyond the RUSTSEC-2026-0047 and -0049 cited in the PR description, this same rustls-webpki 0.102.8 → 0.103.x bump would also resolve three more advisories tagged against the pinned version:

Worth mentioning in the PR description if helpful for reviewer prioritization. Tracked downstream at Nodalix/nodalix-platform#288.

Thanks for the work — appreciated.

aannoo added a commit to aannoo/hcom that referenced this pull request Jun 2, 2026
Add .cargo/audit.toml ignoring RUSTSEC-2026-0104/0098/0099/0049 (rustls-webpki 0.102.8) and RUSTSEC-2025-0134 (rustls-pemfile unmaintained). All are transitive via rumqttc 0.25.1 and unreachable: rumqttc links webpki 0.102 only for a dead #[from] error variant, while TLS verification runs through rustls 0.23 -> rustls-webpki 0.103.13. rumqttc 0.25.1 hard-pins ^0.102 so no clean bump exists; upstream fix bytebeamio/rumqtt#1037 is open but unmerged.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants