Action not permitted
Modal body text goes here.
Modal Title
Modal Body
CERTFR-2026-AVI-0717
Vulnerability from certfr_avis - Published: 2026-06-10 - Updated: 2026-06-10
De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans OpenSSL. Certaines d'entre elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer une exécution de code arbitraire à distance, un déni de service à distance et une atteinte à la confidentialité des données.
Solutions
Se référer au bulletin de sécurité de l'éditeur pour l'obtention des correctifs (cf. section Documentation).
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Description | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 1.0.x antérieures à 1.0.2zq | ||
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 4.x antérieures à 4.0.1 | ||
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 3.5.x antérieures à 3.5.7 | ||
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 1.1.x antérieures à 1.1.1zh | ||
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 3.x antérieures à 3.0.21 | ||
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 3.6.x antérieures à 3.6.3 | ||
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | OpenSSL versions 3.4.x antérieures à 3.4.6 |
References
| Title | Publication Time | Tags | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||
{
"$ref": "https://www.cert.ssi.gouv.fr/openapi.json",
"affected_systems": [
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 1.0.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 1.0.2zq",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 4.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 4.0.1",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 3.5.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 3.5.7",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 1.1.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 1.1.1zh",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 3.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 3.0.21",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 3.6.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 3.6.3",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "OpenSSL versions 3.4.x ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 3.4.6",
"product": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": {
"name": "OpenSSL",
"scada": false
}
}
}
],
"affected_systems_content": "",
"content": "## Solutions\n\nSe r\u00e9f\u00e9rer au bulletin de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 de l\u0027\u00e9diteur pour l\u0027obtention des correctifs (cf. section Documentation).",
"cves": [
{
"name": "CVE-2026-34180",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-34180"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-35188",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-35188"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42766",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42766"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-9076",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-9076"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-34181",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-34181"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42770",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42770"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-45445",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45445"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-7383",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-7383"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42771",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42771"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42765",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42765"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42769",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42769"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-45447",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45447"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-45446",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45446"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-34183",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-34183"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42767",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42767"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42764",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42764"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-42768",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42768"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2026-34182",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-34182"
}
],
"initial_release_date": "2026-06-10T00:00:00",
"last_revision_date": "2026-06-10T00:00:00",
"links": [],
"reference": "CERTFR-2026-AVI-0717",
"revisions": [
{
"description": "Version initiale",
"revision_date": "2026-06-10T00:00:00.000000"
}
],
"risks": [
{
"description": "D\u00e9ni de service \u00e0 distance"
},
{
"description": "Ex\u00e9cution de code arbitraire \u00e0 distance"
},
{
"description": "Atteinte \u00e0 l\u0027int\u00e9grit\u00e9 des donn\u00e9es"
},
{
"description": "Non sp\u00e9cifi\u00e9 par l\u0027\u00e9diteur"
},
{
"description": "Contournement de la politique de s\u00e9curit\u00e9"
},
{
"description": "Atteinte \u00e0 la confidentialit\u00e9 des donn\u00e9es"
}
],
"summary": "De multiples vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s ont \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9couvertes dans OpenSSL. Certaines d\u0027entre elles permettent \u00e0 un attaquant de provoquer une ex\u00e9cution de code arbitraire \u00e0 distance, un d\u00e9ni de service \u00e0 distance et une atteinte \u00e0 la confidentialit\u00e9 des donn\u00e9es.",
"title": "Multiples vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s dans OpenSSL",
"vendor_advisories": [
{
"published_at": "2026-06-09",
"title": "Bulletin de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 OpenSSL",
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
}
]
}
CVE-2026-42769 (GCVE-0-2026-42769)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
Title
Trust-Anchor Substitution via cert/issuer Typo in CMP rootCaKeyUpdate
Summary
Issue Summary: An error in the callback used to verify the certificate
provided in a Root CA key update Certificate Management Protocol (CMP)
message response rendered the certificate validation ineffectual, which
could lead to escalation of credentials from the Registration Authority (RA)
level to the root Certification Authority (root CA) level.
Impact Summary: The Registration Autority could replace the root CA
certificate for the CMP clients with an arbitrary root CA certificate.
One of the parts of the Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), specified in
RFC 9810, is Root Certification Authority (root CA) key Rollover,
which is sent by the server in a message with type 'id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate'.
As part of these messages, 'newWithOld' certificate, the new root CA
certificate signed with the old root CA key, is provided, and verifying its
signature is crucial for transferring the trust from the old CA key to the
new one.
The 'id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate' messages are expected to be processed with
OSSL_CMP_get1_rootCaKeyUpdate(), that is expected to verify the 'newWithOld'
certificate. A typo in the certificate chain building code led to adding
an incorrect certificate ('newWithOld' instead of 'oldRoot') to the
certificate chain, rendering the certificate verification process ineffectual
(only the issuer name and the algorithm OIDs were verified by other parts
of the verification code).
An attacker who already has credentials that satisfy the CMP message
protection checks can generate a new key pair and use a crafted self-signed
certificate in its 'id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate' CMP messages which affected CMP
clients would accept as a new trust anchor.
Significant preconditions for the attack (having valid RA-level credentials)
are the reason the issue was assigned Low severity.
The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as the affected code is
outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Severity
5.3 (Medium)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-295 - Improper Certificate Validation
Assigner
References
5 references
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)
Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)
Bob Beck
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 5.3,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-42769",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T19:38:00.495097Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-09T19:38:05.632Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Bob Beck"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue Summary: An error in the callback used to verify the certificate\u003cbr\u003eprovided in a Root CA key update Certificate Management Protocol (CMP)\u003cbr\u003emessage response rendered the certificate validation ineffectual, which\u003cbr\u003ecould lead to escalation of credentials from the Registration Authority (RA)\u003cbr\u003elevel to the root Certification Authority (root CA) level.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact Summary: The Registration Autority could replace the root CA\u003cbr\u003ecertificate for the CMP clients with an arbitrary root CA certificate.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eOne of the parts of the Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), specified in\u003cbr\u003eRFC 9810, is Root Certification Authority (root CA) key Rollover,\u003cbr\u003ewhich is sent by the server in a message with type \u0027id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate\u0027.\u003cbr\u003eAs part of these messages, \u0027newWithOld\u0027 certificate, the new root CA\u003cbr\u003ecertificate signed with the old root CA key, is provided, and verifying its\u003cbr\u003esignature is crucial for transferring the trust from the old CA key to the\u003cbr\u003enew one.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe \u0027id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate\u0027 messages are expected to be processed with\u003cbr\u003eOSSL_CMP_get1_rootCaKeyUpdate(), that is expected to verify the \u0027newWithOld\u0027\u003cbr\u003ecertificate. A typo in the certificate chain building code led to adding\u003cbr\u003ean incorrect certificate (\u0027newWithOld\u0027 instead of \u0027oldRoot\u0027) to the\u003cbr\u003ecertificate chain, rendering the certificate verification process ineffectual\u003cbr\u003e(only the issuer name and the algorithm OIDs were verified by other parts\u003cbr\u003eof the verification code).\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eAn attacker who already has credentials that satisfy the CMP message\u003cbr\u003eprotection checks can generate a new key pair and use a crafted self-signed\u003cbr\u003ecertificate in its \u0027id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate\u0027 CMP messages which affected CMP\u003cbr\u003eclients would accept as a new trust anchor.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eSignificant preconditions for the attack (having valid RA-level credentials)\u003cbr\u003eare the reason the issue was assigned Low severity.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as the affected code is\u003cbr\u003eoutside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"value": "Issue Summary: An error in the callback used to verify the certificate\nprovided in a Root CA key update Certificate Management Protocol (CMP)\nmessage response rendered the certificate validation ineffectual, which\ncould lead to escalation of credentials from the Registration Authority (RA)\nlevel to the root Certification Authority (root CA) level.\n\nImpact Summary: The Registration Autority could replace the root CA\ncertificate for the CMP clients with an arbitrary root CA certificate.\n\nOne of the parts of the Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), specified in\nRFC 9810, is Root Certification Authority (root CA) key Rollover,\nwhich is sent by the server in a message with type \u0027id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate\u0027.\nAs part of these messages, \u0027newWithOld\u0027 certificate, the new root CA\ncertificate signed with the old root CA key, is provided, and verifying its\nsignature is crucial for transferring the trust from the old CA key to the\nnew one.\n\nThe \u0027id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate\u0027 messages are expected to be processed with\nOSSL_CMP_get1_rootCaKeyUpdate(), that is expected to verify the \u0027newWithOld\u0027\ncertificate. A typo in the certificate chain building code led to adding\nan incorrect certificate (\u0027newWithOld\u0027 instead of \u0027oldRoot\u0027) to the\ncertificate chain, rendering the certificate verification process ineffectual\n(only the issuer name and the algorithm OIDs were verified by other parts\nof the verification code).\n\nAn attacker who already has credentials that satisfy the CMP message\nprotection checks can generate a new key pair and use a crafted self-signed\ncertificate in its \u0027id-it-rootCaKeyUpdate\u0027 CMP messages which affected CMP\nclients would accept as a new trust anchor.\n\nSignificant preconditions for the attack (having valid RA-level credentials)\nare the reason the issue was assigned Low severity.\n\nThe FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as the affected code is\noutside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Low"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-295",
"description": "CWE-295 Improper Certificate Validation",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:06.084Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/d531f21c0fe99067a66fc0ff1161ef127f9cd70b"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/d35cd473a271bf3ce7bf3d32af53217fb83ae92c"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/54d0989997e5fc26057009a9782c3441ce3842fb"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/777b363b16fcf2153bb3ded39dc3838713667c44"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Trust-Anchor Substitution via cert/issuer Typo in CMP rootCaKeyUpdate",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-42769",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:28.999Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-04-29T09:22:27.969Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:06.084Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-42770 (GCVE-0-2026-42770)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
Title
FFC-DH Peer Validation Uses Attacker-Supplied q
Summary
Issue summary: When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42)
peer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership.
Impact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying the
victim's p and g parameters, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the
cofactor (p−1)/q_local), and a public value Y of order r can recover the
victim's private key after a small number of key exchange attempts.
When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the
subgroup membership check Y^q ≡ 1 (mod p) is performed using the peer's
own q parameter, not the local key's q. The peer's domain parameters are
then matched against the domain parameters of the private key, but the value
of q is not compared.
A malicious peer who presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim's p, g,
a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor), and a public
value Y of order r passes all checks. The shared secret then takes only
r distinct values, leaking priv mod r. Repeating for each small-prime
factor of the cofactor and combining via CRT recovers the full private
key (Lim–Lee / small-subgroup-confinement attack).
The realistic attack surface is narrow: principally CMP deployments with
long-lived RA/CA DHX keys and bespoke enterprise or government applications
using X9.42 DHX static keys with interactive protocols and therefore this
issue was assigned Low severity.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are affected by this
issue.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
6 references
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)
Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)
Viktor Dukhovni
Norbert Pócs
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 3.7,
"baseSeverity": "LOW",
"confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-42770",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T19:34:57.693097Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-09T19:35:28.505Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.21",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Viktor Dukhovni"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Norbert P\u00f3cs"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42)\u003cbr\u003epeer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying the\u003cbr\u003evictim\u0027s p and g parameters, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the\u003cbr\u003ecofactor (p\u22121)/q_local), and a public value Y of order r can recover the\u003cbr\u003evictim\u0027s private key after a small number of key exchange attempts.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eWhen EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the\u003cbr\u003esubgroup membership check Y^q \u2261 1 (mod p) is performed using the peer\u0027s\u003cbr\u003eown q parameter, not the local key\u0027s q. The peer\u0027s domain parameters are\u003cbr\u003ethen matched against the domain parameters of the private key, but the value\u003cbr\u003eof q is not compared.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eA malicious peer who presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim\u0027s p, g,\u003cbr\u003ea forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor), and a public\u003cbr\u003evalue Y of order r passes all checks. The shared secret then takes only\u003cbr\u003er distinct values, leaking priv mod r. Repeating for each small-prime\u003cbr\u003efactor of the cofactor and combining via CRT recovers the full private\u003cbr\u003ekey (Lim\u2013Lee / small-subgroup-confinement attack).\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe realistic attack surface is narrow: principally CMP deployments with\u003cbr\u003elong-lived RA/CA DHX keys and bespoke enterprise or government applications\u003cbr\u003eusing X9.42 DHX static keys with interactive protocols and therefore this\u003cbr\u003eissue was assigned Low severity.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are affected by this\u003cbr\u003eissue."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42)\npeer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership.\n\nImpact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying the\nvictim\u0027s p and g parameters, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the\ncofactor (p\u22121)/q_local), and a public value Y of order r can recover the\nvictim\u0027s private key after a small number of key exchange attempts.\n\nWhen EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the\nsubgroup membership check Y^q \u2261 1 (mod p) is performed using the peer\u0027s\nown q parameter, not the local key\u0027s q. The peer\u0027s domain parameters are\nthen matched against the domain parameters of the private key, but the value\nof q is not compared.\n\nA malicious peer who presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim\u0027s p, g,\na forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor), and a public\nvalue Y of order r passes all checks. The shared secret then takes only\nr distinct values, leaking priv mod r. Repeating for each small-prime\nfactor of the cofactor and combining via CRT recovers the full private\nkey (Lim\u2013Lee / small-subgroup-confinement attack).\n\nThe realistic attack surface is narrow: principally CMP deployments with\nlong-lived RA/CA DHX keys and bespoke enterprise or government applications\nusing X9.42 DHX static keys with interactive protocols and therefore this\nissue was assigned Low severity.\n\nThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are affected by this\nissue."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Low"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325 Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:07.613Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/3da5a516cd2635a320ff748503db2cef7c4b0f02"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/3ddbb7ab50bd93dfc59cbe08e269a67605aeebdb"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ca2237ab5615641b662183b077f62c08d75e8070"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/5f452bba2c681423d8fcffd120a19b757ee42e3c"
},
{
"name": "3.0.21 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7fbfde7677ed8808828bf00ff01c937ca04bdda2"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "FFC-DH Peer Validation Uses Attacker-Supplied q",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-42770",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:29.802Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-04-29T09:22:27.969Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:07.613Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-42771 (GCVE-0-2026-42771)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
Title
Possible Out of Bounds Read in X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_email()
Summary
Issue summary: When the X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_email is called by an
application to validate a crafted e-mail address, such as during S/MIME
message validation, an out of bounds read can happen.
Impact summary: This out of bounds read will not directly exfiltrate
the data read to the attacker so the most likely result is a crash and
a Denial of Service.
An internal helper function called from X509_VERIFY_PARAM_[set|add]_email()
used a wrong length when validating the local part of an email address.
This could cause the 64 octet limit on the local part of an email address
to be not enforced, or cause an out of bound read and potentially a crash.
The bug is reachable via S-MIME validation with a crafted From: address
supplied in an email message that can potentially cause a crash.
No FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside
the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Severity
6.2 (Medium)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-125 - Out-of-bounds Read
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt | vendor-advisory |
| https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/6cd1876… | patch |
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
TrendAI Zero Day Initiative
Bob Beck
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "LOCAL",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 6.2,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-42771",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T18:59:41.123767Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-09T19:00:12.343Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "TrendAI Zero Day Initiative"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Bob Beck"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: When the X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_email is called by an\u003cbr\u003eapplication to validate a crafted e-mail address, such as during S/MIME\u003cbr\u003emessage validation, an out of bounds read can happen.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: This out of bounds read will not directly exfiltrate\u003cbr\u003ethe data read to the attacker so the most likely result is a crash and\u003cbr\u003ea Denial of Service.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eAn internal helper function called from X509_VERIFY_PARAM_[set|add]_email()\u003cbr\u003eused a wrong length when validating the local part of an email address.\u003cbr\u003eThis could cause the 64 octet limit on the local part of an email address\u003cbr\u003eto be not enforced, or cause an out of bound read and potentially a crash.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe bug is reachable via S-MIME validation with a crafted From: address\u003cbr\u003esupplied in an email message that can potentially cause a crash.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside\u003cbr\u003ethe OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: When the X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_email is called by an\napplication to validate a crafted e-mail address, such as during S/MIME\nmessage validation, an out of bounds read can happen.\n\nImpact summary: This out of bounds read will not directly exfiltrate\nthe data read to the attacker so the most likely result is a crash and\na Denial of Service.\n\nAn internal helper function called from X509_VERIFY_PARAM_[set|add]_email()\nused a wrong length when validating the local part of an email address.\nThis could cause the 64 octet limit on the local part of an email address\nto be not enforced, or cause an out of bound read and potentially a crash.\n\nThe bug is reachable via S-MIME validation with a crafted From: address\nsupplied in an email message that can potentially cause a crash.\n\nNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside\nthe OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Low"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-125",
"description": "CWE-125 Out-of-bounds Read",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:09.673Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/6cd187689f8180c1f8a3acde21f88190c4a20de7"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Possible Out of Bounds Read in X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_email()",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-42771",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:30.565Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-04-29T09:22:27.969Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:09.673Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-45445 (GCVE-0-2026-45445)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
Title
AES-OCB IV Ignored on EVP_Cipher() Path
Summary
Issue summary: When an application drives an AES-OCB context through the
public EVP_Cipher() one-shot interface, the application-supplied
initialisation vector (IV) is silently discarded.
Impact summary: Every message encrypted under the same key uses the
same effective nonce regardless of the IV supplied by the caller,
resulting in (key, nonce) reuse and loss of confidentiality. If the
same code path is used to compute the authentication tag, the tag
depends only on the (key, IV) pair and not on the plaintext or
ciphertext, allowing universal forgery of arbitrary ciphertext from a
single captured message.
OpenSSL provides two ways to drive a cipher: the documented streaming
interface (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) and a lower-level
one-shot, EVP_Cipher(), whose documentation explicitly recommends
against use by applications in favour of EVP_CipherUpdate() and
EVP_CipherFinal_ex(). The OCB provider's streaming handler flushes
the application-supplied IV into the OCB context before processing
data; the one-shot handler did not. Every call to EVP_Cipher() on an
AES-OCB context therefore ran with the all-zero key-derived offset
state left by cipher initialisation, regardless of the caller's IV.
If EVP_EncryptFinal_ex() is subsequently used to obtain the
authentication tag, the deferred IV setup runs at that point and
clears the running checksum that should have been accumulated over the
plaintext. The resulting tag is a function of (key, IV) only and
verifies against any ciphertext produced under the same (key, IV)
pair.
The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected: AES-OCB is not a
TLS cipher suite, and libssl does not call EVP_Cipher() in any case.
Applications that drive AES-OCB through the documented streaming AEAD
API (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) are not affected. Only
applications that combine the AES-OCB cipher with the EVP_Cipher()
one-shot API are vulnerable.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by
this issue, as AES-OCB is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Severity
7.5 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
6 references
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)
Viktor Dukhovni
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-45445",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T19:22:47.789275Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-09T19:23:02.138Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.21",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Viktor Dukhovni"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: When an application drives an AES-OCB context through the\u003cbr\u003epublic EVP_Cipher() one-shot interface, the application-supplied\u003cbr\u003einitialisation vector (IV) is silently discarded.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: Every message encrypted under the same key uses the\u003cbr\u003esame effective nonce regardless of the IV supplied by the caller,\u003cbr\u003eresulting in (key, nonce) reuse and loss of confidentiality. If the\u003cbr\u003esame code path is used to compute the authentication tag, the tag\u003cbr\u003edepends only on the (key, IV) pair and not on the plaintext or\u003cbr\u003eciphertext, allowing universal forgery of arbitrary ciphertext from a\u003cbr\u003esingle captured message.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eOpenSSL provides two ways to drive a cipher: the documented streaming\u003cbr\u003einterface (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) and a lower-level\u003cbr\u003eone-shot, EVP_Cipher(), whose documentation explicitly recommends\u003cbr\u003eagainst use by applications in favour of EVP_CipherUpdate() and\u003cbr\u003eEVP_CipherFinal_ex(). The OCB provider\u0027s streaming handler flushes\u003cbr\u003ethe application-supplied IV into the OCB context before processing\u003cbr\u003edata; the one-shot handler did not. Every call to EVP_Cipher() on an\u003cbr\u003eAES-OCB context therefore ran with the all-zero key-derived offset\u003cbr\u003estate left by cipher initialisation, regardless of the caller\u0027s IV.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eIf EVP_EncryptFinal_ex() is subsequently used to obtain the\u003cbr\u003eauthentication tag, the deferred IV setup runs at that point and\u003cbr\u003eclears the running checksum that should have been accumulated over the\u003cbr\u003eplaintext. The resulting tag is a function of (key, IV) only and\u003cbr\u003everifies against any ciphertext produced under the same (key, IV)\u003cbr\u003epair.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected: AES-OCB is not a\u003cbr\u003eTLS cipher suite, and libssl does not call EVP_Cipher() in any case.\u003cbr\u003eApplications that drive AES-OCB through the documented streaming AEAD\u003cbr\u003eAPI (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) are not affected. Only\u003cbr\u003eapplications that combine the AES-OCB cipher with the EVP_Cipher()\u003cbr\u003eone-shot API are vulnerable.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by\u003cbr\u003ethis issue, as AES-OCB is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: When an application drives an AES-OCB context through the\npublic EVP_Cipher() one-shot interface, the application-supplied\ninitialisation vector (IV) is silently discarded.\n\nImpact summary: Every message encrypted under the same key uses the\nsame effective nonce regardless of the IV supplied by the caller,\nresulting in (key, nonce) reuse and loss of confidentiality. If the\nsame code path is used to compute the authentication tag, the tag\ndepends only on the (key, IV) pair and not on the plaintext or\nciphertext, allowing universal forgery of arbitrary ciphertext from a\nsingle captured message.\n\nOpenSSL provides two ways to drive a cipher: the documented streaming\ninterface (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) and a lower-level\none-shot, EVP_Cipher(), whose documentation explicitly recommends\nagainst use by applications in favour of EVP_CipherUpdate() and\nEVP_CipherFinal_ex(). The OCB provider\u0027s streaming handler flushes\nthe application-supplied IV into the OCB context before processing\ndata; the one-shot handler did not. Every call to EVP_Cipher() on an\nAES-OCB context therefore ran with the all-zero key-derived offset\nstate left by cipher initialisation, regardless of the caller\u0027s IV.\n\nIf EVP_EncryptFinal_ex() is subsequently used to obtain the\nauthentication tag, the deferred IV setup runs at that point and\nclears the running checksum that should have been accumulated over the\nplaintext. The resulting tag is a function of (key, IV) only and\nverifies against any ciphertext produced under the same (key, IV)\npair.\n\nThe OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected: AES-OCB is not a\nTLS cipher suite, and libssl does not call EVP_Cipher() in any case.\nApplications that drive AES-OCB through the documented streaming AEAD\nAPI (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) are not affected. Only\napplications that combine the AES-OCB cipher with the EVP_Cipher()\none-shot API are vulnerable.\n\nThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by\nthis issue, as AES-OCB is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Moderate"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325 Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:10.949Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/843c9b94ca9c2ed248bb30127bb4f3d7af0d607c"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/787a6dfba81b7b09c1e05ab31396c0cd7c36b3f7"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/983d54b5cce8d16147548ed1a37892d1720bbab6"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7ac4715234ee72d9f3c93426a2c08554b5b771af"
},
{
"name": "3.0.21 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/323f0b6e7d530a4cb4336d50c88cb70f3ac2a451"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "AES-OCB IV Ignored on EVP_Cipher() Path",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-45445",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:31.338Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-12T14:34:06.276Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:10.949Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-45446 (GCVE-0-2026-45446)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
Title
Incorrect Tag Processing for Empty Messages in AES-GCM-SIV and AES-SIV modes
Summary
Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV
(RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated
Data) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages.
Impact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD
to the victim's application using these ciphers.
AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD
modes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated
but not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte
tag. On decrypt, `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` is documented to return success only
if the tag is verified succesfully.
In OpenSSL's provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is
computed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data.
If the caller supplies AAD and then calls `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` without
invocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received
ciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its
all-zeros value.
When AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty
ciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not
know, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it's
necessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without
resetting the key.
AES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since
OpenSSL 3.2.
No protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support
either AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must
implement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the
ciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this
issue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is
outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Severity
4.8 (Medium)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
6 references
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)
Dmitry Belyavskiy (Red Hat)
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 4.8,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"integrityImpact": "LOW",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-45446",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T18:48:41.903041Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-09T18:49:07.756Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.21",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Alex Gaynor (Anthropic)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Dmitry Belyavskiy (Red Hat)"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV\u003cbr\u003e(RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated\u003cbr\u003eData) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD\u003cbr\u003eto the victim\u0027s application using these ciphers.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eAES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD\u003cbr\u003emodes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated\u003cbr\u003ebut not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte\u003cbr\u003etag. On decrypt, `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` is documented to return success only\u003cbr\u003eif the tag is verified succesfully.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eIn OpenSSL\u0027s provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is\u003cbr\u003ecomputed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data.\u003cbr\u003eIf the caller supplies AAD and then calls `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` without\u003cbr\u003einvocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received\u003cbr\u003eciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its\u003cbr\u003eall-zeros value.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eWhen AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty\u003cbr\u003eciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not\u003cbr\u003eknow, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it\u0027s\u003cbr\u003enecessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without\u003cbr\u003eresetting the key.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eAES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since\u003cbr\u003eOpenSSL 3.2.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eNo protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support\u003cbr\u003eeither AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must\u003cbr\u003eimplement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the\u003cbr\u003eciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this\u003cbr\u003eissue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is\u003cbr\u003eoutside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV\n(RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated\nData) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages.\n\nImpact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD\nto the victim\u0027s application using these ciphers.\n\nAES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD\nmodes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated\nbut not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte\ntag. On decrypt, `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` is documented to return success only\nif the tag is verified succesfully.\n\nIn OpenSSL\u0027s provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is\ncomputed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data.\nIf the caller supplies AAD and then calls `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` without\ninvocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received\nciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its\nall-zeros value.\n\nWhen AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty\nciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not\nknow, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it\u0027s\nnecessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without\nresetting the key.\n\nAES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since\nOpenSSL 3.2.\n\nNo protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support\neither AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must\nimplement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the\nciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives.\n\nThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this\nissue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is\noutside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Low"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325 Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:14.092Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/25b32cd9d41d2bc01b6abc425bb4baf2c2236fdc"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/eec5e9bf0d867333b8495e456f5235d225798a68"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7fe3f33a3b3a4c487aa4dcdbc87057f66ffd2b85"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/daca0f48e4a69a2892a62262bad59e62a8a76598"
},
{
"name": "3.0.21 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/71e2a5d263518cf5866043bd60ee4994d59e53a3"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Incorrect Tag Processing for Empty Messages in AES-GCM-SIV and AES-SIV modes",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-45446",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:32.120Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-12T14:34:06.277Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:14.092Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-45447 (GCVE-0-2026-45447)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-30 03:17
VLAI
EPSS
Title
Heap Use-After-Free in the PKCS7_verify() Function
Summary
Issue summary: A specially crafted PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message could
trigger a use-after-free during PKCS#7 signature verification.
Impact summary: A use-after-free may result in process crashes, heap
corruption, or potentially remote code execution.
When processing a PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message, if the SignedData
digestAlgorithms field is present as an empty ASN.1 SET, OpenSSL may
incorrectly free a caller-owned BIO during PKCS7_verify(). A subsequent
use of the BIO by the calling application results in a use-after-free
condition.
In the common case this occurs when the application later calls
BIO_free() on the BIO originally passed to PKCS7_verify(). Depending
on allocator behavior and application-specific BIO usage patterns, this
may result in a crash or other memory corruption. In some application
contexts this may potentially be exploitable for remote code execution.
Applications that process PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed messages using OpenSSL
PKCS#7 APIs may be affected. Applications using the CMS APIs for this
processing are not affected.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this
issue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Severity
8.8 (High)
8.1 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
Assigner
References
14 references
Impacted products
17 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL |
Affected:
4.0.0 , < 4.0.1
(semver)
Affected: 3.6.0 , < 3.6.3 (semver) Affected: 3.5.0 , < 3.5.7 (semver) Affected: 3.4.0 , < 3.4.6 (semver) Affected: 3.0.0 , < 3.0.21 (semver) Affected: 1.1.1 , < 1.1.1zh (custom) Affected: 1.0.2 , < 1.0.2zq (custom) |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 10) |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:10.2 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 9) |
cpe:/a:redhat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 10) |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:10.2 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 8) |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8::baseos |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS EUS EXTENSION (v.8.6) |
cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_eus_long_life:8.6::baseos |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS E4S (v.8.8) |
cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_e4s:8.8::baseos |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS TUS (v.8.8) |
cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_tus:8.8::baseos |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 9) |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:9::baseos |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Discovery 2 |
cpe:/a:redhat:discovery:2::el9 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5 |
cpe:/a:redhat:rhui:5::el9 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:6 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:7 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:9 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 |
cpe:/a:redhat:openshift:4 |
|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 |
cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:10 |
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Thai Duong (Calif.io in collaboration with Claude and Anthropic Research)
Igor Ustinov
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-45447",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-10T03:59:38.212378Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T13:32:20.413Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
},
{
"affected": [
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:10.2"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 10)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/a:redhat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 9)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:10.2"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 10)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8::baseos"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 8)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_eus_long_life:8.6::baseos"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS EUS EXTENSION (v.8.6)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_e4s:8.8::baseos"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS E4S (v.8.8)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_tus:8.8::baseos"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS TUS (v.8.8)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:9::baseos"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 9)",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/a:redhat:discovery:2::el9"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Discovery 2",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/a:redhat:rhui:5::el9"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:6"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:7"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:9"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/a:redhat:openshift:4"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
},
{
"cpes": [
"cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:10"
],
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10",
"vendor": "Red Hat"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T00:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "A flaw was found in OpenSSL. When processing a specially crafted PKCS#7 or S/MIME (Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) signed message, a heap use-after-free vulnerability in the PKCS7_verify() function can be triggered. This occurs if the SignedData digestAlgorithms field is present as an empty ASN.1 SET, leading to incorrect memory deallocation. A remote attacker could exploit this to cause application crashes, memory corruption, or potentially achieve remote code execution."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"namespace": "https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/",
"value": "Important"
},
"type": "Red Hat severity rating"
}
},
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS"
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-825",
"description": "Expired Pointer Dereference",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-30T03:17:56.695Z",
"orgId": "0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c",
"shortName": "redhat-SADP"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"vdb-entry",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-45447"
},
{
"name": "RHBZ#2481898",
"tags": [
"issue-tracking",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2481898"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_sadp-csaf-vex"
],
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-45447.json"
},
{
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:25237"
},
{
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:25239"
},
{
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:26275"
},
{
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:29197"
},
{
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"x_refsource_REDHAT"
],
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:26319"
}
],
"solutions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RHSA-2026:25237: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 10), Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 10)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RHSA-2026:25239: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream (v. 9), Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 9)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RHSA-2026:26275: Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS (v. 8), Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS E4S (v.8.8), Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS EUS EXTENSION (v.8.6), Red Hat Enterprise Linux BaseOS TUS (v.8.8)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RHSA-2026:29197: Red Hat Discovery 2"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RHSA-2026:26319: Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5"
}
],
"timeline": [
{
"lang": "en",
"time": "2026-05-27T14:17:46.000Z",
"value": "Reported to Red Hat."
},
{
"lang": "en",
"time": "2026-06-09T00:00:00.000Z",
"value": "Made public."
}
],
"title": "openssl: Heap Use-After-Free in OpenSSL PKCS7_verify()",
"workarounds": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability."
}
],
"x_adpType": "supplier",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "sadp-cli 1.0.0"
}
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.21",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.1.1zh",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.1.1",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.0.2zq",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.0.2",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Thai Duong (Calif.io in collaboration with Claude and Anthropic Research)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Igor Ustinov"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: A specially crafted PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message could\u003cbr\u003etrigger a use-after-free during PKCS#7 signature verification.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A use-after-free may result in process crashes, heap\u003cbr\u003ecorruption, or potentially remote code execution.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eWhen processing a PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message, if the SignedData\u003cbr\u003edigestAlgorithms field is present as an empty ASN.1 SET, OpenSSL may\u003cbr\u003eincorrectly free a caller-owned BIO during PKCS7_verify(). A subsequent\u003cbr\u003euse of the BIO by the calling application results in a use-after-free\u003cbr\u003econdition.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eIn the common case this occurs when the application later calls\u003cbr\u003eBIO_free() on the BIO originally passed to PKCS7_verify(). Depending\u003cbr\u003eon allocator behavior and application-specific BIO usage patterns, this\u003cbr\u003emay result in a crash or other memory corruption. In some application\u003cbr\u003econtexts this may potentially be exploitable for remote code execution.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eApplications that process PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed messages using OpenSSL\u003cbr\u003ePKCS#7 APIs may be affected. Applications using the CMS APIs for this\u003cbr\u003eprocessing are not affected.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this\u003cbr\u003eissue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: A specially crafted PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message could\ntrigger a use-after-free during PKCS#7 signature verification.\n\nImpact summary: A use-after-free may result in process crashes, heap\ncorruption, or potentially remote code execution.\n\nWhen processing a PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message, if the SignedData\ndigestAlgorithms field is present as an empty ASN.1 SET, OpenSSL may\nincorrectly free a caller-owned BIO during PKCS7_verify(). A subsequent\nuse of the BIO by the calling application results in a use-after-free\ncondition.\n\nIn the common case this occurs when the application later calls\nBIO_free() on the BIO originally passed to PKCS7_verify(). Depending\non allocator behavior and application-specific BIO usage patterns, this\nmay result in a crash or other memory corruption. In some application\ncontexts this may potentially be exploitable for remote code execution.\n\nApplications that process PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed messages using OpenSSL\nPKCS#7 APIs may be affected. Applications using the CMS APIs for this\nprocessing are not affected.\n\nThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this\nissue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "High"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-416",
"description": "CWE-416 Use After Free",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:48:15.381Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/3aad5eb7af4de4ee0633c30a8541a54d9bbde63c"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/c505d7559da5d5f9f2c3913c6883a5562ce7273e"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7d4a980c62258c5910cc883936e0c8dbab4d75a8"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a541ae8bfe849a30cc885e8780715c0f488e496c"
},
{
"name": "3.0.21 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/9dfd688ad2290fc5075cacbc9bf0c9a93eefed54"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Heap Use-After-Free in the PKCS7_verify() Function",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-45447",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:32.914Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-12T14:34:06.277Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-30T03:17:56.695Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-7383 (GCVE-0-2026-7383)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:47
VLAI
EPSS
Title
Possible Heap Buffer Overflow in ASN.1 Multibyte String Conversion
Summary
Issue summary: A signed integer overflow when sizing the destination
buffer for Unicode output in ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() can lead to a heap
buffer overflow.
Impact summary: A heap buffer overflow may lead to a crash or possibly
attacker controlled code execution or other undefined behaviour.
In ASN1_mbstring_copy() and ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() the destination
size for Unicode output is computed in a signed int: by left shift
of the input character count for BMPSTRING (UTF-16) and
UNIVERSALSTRING (UTF-32), and by summing per-character byte counts
for UTF8STRING. The calculation overflows when the input reaches
around 2^30 characters. In the worst case (UNIVERSALSTRING at 2^30
characters) the size wraps to zero, OPENSSL_malloc(1) is called, and
the subsequent character copy writes several gigabytes past the
one-byte allocation.
X.509 certificate processing routes through ASN1_STRING_set_by_NID(),
whose DIRSTRING_TYPE mask excludes UNIVERSALSTRING and whose per-NID
size limits cap the input length; no network protocol or
certificate-handling path in OpenSSL exercises the overflow.
Triggering the bug requires an application that calls
ASN1_mbstring_copy() or ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() directly, or registers
a custom string type via ASN1_STRING_TABLE_add(), with
attacker-controlled input on the order of half a gigabyte or more.
For these reasons this issue was assigned Low severity.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by
this issue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module
boundary.
Severity
8.1 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-787 - Out-of-bounds Write
Assigner
References
6 references
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Zehua Qiao
Jinwen He
Viktor Dukhovni
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-7383",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T03:58:57.944Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.21",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.1.1zh",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.1.1",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.0.2zq",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.0.2",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Zehua Qiao"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Jinwen He"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Viktor Dukhovni"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: A signed integer overflow when sizing the destination\u003cbr\u003ebuffer for Unicode output in ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() can lead to a heap\u003cbr\u003ebuffer overflow.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A heap buffer overflow may lead to a crash or possibly\u003cbr\u003eattacker controlled code execution or other undefined behaviour.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eIn ASN1_mbstring_copy() and ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() the destination\u003cbr\u003esize for Unicode output is computed in a signed int: by left shift\u003cbr\u003eof the input character count for BMPSTRING (UTF-16) and\u003cbr\u003eUNIVERSALSTRING (UTF-32), and by summing per-character byte counts\u003cbr\u003efor UTF8STRING. The calculation overflows when the input reaches\u003cbr\u003earound 2^30 characters. In the worst case (UNIVERSALSTRING at 2^30\u003cbr\u003echaracters) the size wraps to zero, OPENSSL_malloc(1) is called, and\u003cbr\u003ethe subsequent character copy writes several gigabytes past the\u003cbr\u003eone-byte allocation.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eX.509 certificate processing routes through ASN1_STRING_set_by_NID(),\u003cbr\u003ewhose DIRSTRING_TYPE mask excludes UNIVERSALSTRING and whose per-NID\u003cbr\u003esize limits cap the input length; no network protocol or\u003cbr\u003ecertificate-handling path in OpenSSL exercises the overflow.\u003cbr\u003eTriggering the bug requires an application that calls\u003cbr\u003eASN1_mbstring_copy() or ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() directly, or registers\u003cbr\u003ea custom string type via ASN1_STRING_TABLE_add(), with\u003cbr\u003eattacker-controlled input on the order of half a gigabyte or more.\u003cbr\u003eFor these reasons this issue was assigned Low severity.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by\u003cbr\u003ethis issue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module\u003cbr\u003eboundary."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: A signed integer overflow when sizing the destination\nbuffer for Unicode output in ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() can lead to a heap\nbuffer overflow.\n\nImpact summary: A heap buffer overflow may lead to a crash or possibly\nattacker controlled code execution or other undefined behaviour.\n\nIn ASN1_mbstring_copy() and ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() the destination\nsize for Unicode output is computed in a signed int: by left shift\nof the input character count for BMPSTRING (UTF-16) and\nUNIVERSALSTRING (UTF-32), and by summing per-character byte counts\nfor UTF8STRING. The calculation overflows when the input reaches\naround 2^30 characters. In the worst case (UNIVERSALSTRING at 2^30\ncharacters) the size wraps to zero, OPENSSL_malloc(1) is called, and\nthe subsequent character copy writes several gigabytes past the\none-byte allocation.\n\nX.509 certificate processing routes through ASN1_STRING_set_by_NID(),\nwhose DIRSTRING_TYPE mask excludes UNIVERSALSTRING and whose per-NID\nsize limits cap the input length; no network protocol or\ncertificate-handling path in OpenSSL exercises the overflow.\nTriggering the bug requires an application that calls\nASN1_mbstring_copy() or ASN1_mbstring_ncopy() directly, or registers\na custom string type via ASN1_STRING_TABLE_add(), with\nattacker-controlled input on the order of half a gigabyte or more.\nFor these reasons this issue was assigned Low severity.\n\nThe FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by\nthis issue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module\nboundary."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Low"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-787",
"description": "CWE-787 Out-of-bounds Write",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:47:47.578Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/d32350ae8ef7426718f5aa9e383d4b51398ee255"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/c332adaced43bcbb85f97410597e951c11ec3083"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/80c15faaf78042bbb8654a0e234c50c381732f74"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/4f8d2bddaa2c8e06f9c33390ee1717059a6e4be6"
},
{
"name": "3.0.21 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/bd17511070fb39a67bfa19682affb765e706a974"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Possible Heap Buffer Overflow in ASN.1 Multibyte String Conversion",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-7383",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:15.508Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-04-29T08:21:07.253Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:47:47.578Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-9076 (GCVE-0-2026-9076)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:47
VLAI
EPSS
Title
Out-of-Bounds Read in CMS Password-Based Decryption
Summary
Issue summary: When CMS password-based decryption (RFC 3211 / PWRI key unwrap)
processes attacker-supplied CMS data, an attacker-chosen stream-mode KEK
cipher can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read in kek_unwrap_key().
Impact summary: A heap buffer over-read may trigger a crash which leads to
Denial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory
page boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information
disclosure as the over-read bytes are not revealed to the attacker.
The key unwrapping function performs a check-byte test as specified in the
RFC that reads 7 bytes from a heap allocation that is based on the wrapped
key length from the message. There is a minimum length check based on the
block length of the wrapping cipher. However the cipher is selected from
an OID carried in the attacker's PWRI keyEncryptionAlgorithm with no
requirement that the cipher be a block cipher. When an attacker selects
a stream-mode cipher the guard will be ineffective and the allocated buffer
containing the unwrapped key can be too small to fit the check-bytes
specified in the RFC and a buffer over-read can happen.
Applications calling CMS_decrypt() or CMS_decrypt_set1_password()
(equivalently openssl cms -decrypt -pwri_password ...) on untrusted CMS
data are vulnerable to this issue. No password knowledge is required: the
over-read happens during the unwrap attempt before any authentication
succeeds.
The over-read is limited to a few bytes and is not written to output, so
there is no information disclosure. Triggering a crash requires the
allocation to border unmapped memory, which is unlikely with the normal
allocator.
The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue.
Severity
7.5 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-125 - Out-of-bounds Read
Assigner
References
6 references
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-06-09 14:00
Credits
Bhabani Sankar Das
Haruki Oyama (Waseda University)
Nikola Pajkovsky
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-9076",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-09T19:04:07.840133Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-09T19:04:20.258Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.21",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.1.1zh",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.1.1",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.0.2zq",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.0.2",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Bhabani Sankar Das"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Haruki Oyama (Waseda University)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Nikola Pajkovsky"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-09T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "Issue summary: When CMS password-based decryption (RFC 3211 / PWRI key unwrap)\u003cbr\u003eprocesses attacker-supplied CMS data, an attacker-chosen stream-mode KEK\u003cbr\u003ecipher can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read in kek_unwrap_key().\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A heap buffer over-read may trigger a crash which leads to\u003cbr\u003eDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\u003cbr\u003epage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\u003cbr\u003edisclosure as the over-read bytes are not revealed to the attacker.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe key unwrapping function performs a check-byte test as specified in the\u003cbr\u003eRFC that reads 7 bytes from a heap allocation that is based on the wrapped\u003cbr\u003ekey length from the message. There is a minimum length check based on the\u003cbr\u003eblock length of the wrapping cipher. However the cipher is selected from\u003cbr\u003ean OID carried in the attacker\u0027s PWRI keyEncryptionAlgorithm with no\u003cbr\u003erequirement that the cipher be a block cipher. When an attacker selects\u003cbr\u003ea stream-mode cipher the guard will be ineffective and the allocated buffer\u003cbr\u003econtaining the unwrapped key can be too small to fit the check-bytes\u003cbr\u003especified in the RFC and a buffer over-read can happen.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eApplications calling CMS_decrypt() or CMS_decrypt_set1_password()\u003cbr\u003e(equivalently openssl cms -decrypt -pwri_password ...) on untrusted CMS\u003cbr\u003edata are vulnerable to this issue. No password knowledge is required: the\u003cbr\u003eover-read happens during the unwrap attempt before any authentication\u003cbr\u003esucceeds.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe over-read is limited to a few bytes and is not written to output, so\u003cbr\u003ethere is no information disclosure. Triggering a crash requires the\u003cbr\u003eallocation to border unmapped memory, which is unlikely with the normal\u003cbr\u003eallocator.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules are not affected by this issue."
}
],
"value": "Issue summary: When CMS password-based decryption (RFC 3211 / PWRI key unwrap)\nprocesses attacker-supplied CMS data, an attacker-chosen stream-mode KEK\ncipher can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read in kek_unwrap_key().\n\nImpact summary: A heap buffer over-read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not revealed to the attacker.\n\nThe key unwrapping function performs a check-byte test as specified in the\nRFC that reads 7 bytes from a heap allocation that is based on the wrapped\nkey length from the message. There is a minimum length check based on the\nblock length of the wrapping cipher. However the cipher is selected from\nan OID carried in the attacker\u0027s PWRI keyEncryptionAlgorithm with no\nrequirement that the cipher be a block cipher. When an attacker selects\na stream-mode cipher the guard will be ineffective and the allocated buffer\ncontaining the unwrapped key can be too small to fit the check-bytes\nspecified in the RFC and a buffer over-read can happen.\n\nApplications calling CMS_decrypt() or CMS_decrypt_set1_password()\n(equivalently openssl cms -decrypt -pwri_password ...) on untrusted CMS\ndata are vulnerable to this issue. No password knowledge is required: the\nover-read happens during the unwrap attempt before any authentication\nsucceeds.\n\nThe over-read is limited to a few bytes and is not written to output, so\nthere is no information disclosure. Triggering a crash requires the\nallocation to border unmapped memory, which is unlikely with the normal\nallocator.\n\nThe FIPS modules are not affected by this issue."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"format": "other",
"other": {
"content": {
"text": "Low"
},
"type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-125",
"description": "CWE-125 Out-of-bounds Read",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:47:51.139Z",
"orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"shortName": "openssl"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
},
{
"name": "4.0.1 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/3d8d5bc1056b2f62da9fede23fedbf47e85187b0"
},
{
"name": "3.6.3 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/77bf00ab13f6ff5e516535432f0328ed70ec0c26"
},
{
"name": "3.5.7 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/715349a1d7c6db970e6815dafb90915f07307f98"
},
{
"name": "3.4.6 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/05b066366842f930fadd9a6e94df98030af431bb"
},
{
"name": "3.0.21 git commit",
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/eecbe330977e8d023aae1ca2d9bdbe983ef3fdc6"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Out-of-Bounds Read in CMS Password-Based Decryption",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
"assignerShortName": "openssl",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-9076",
"datePublished": "2026-06-09T16:03:16.306Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-20T12:43:37.677Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-10T07:47:51.139Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
Loading…
Trend slope:
-
(linear fit over daily sighting counts)
Show additional events:
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…