FKIE_CVE-2026-14457
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-08-25 13:17 - Updated: 2026-08-25 14:16
Severity
Summary
Issue summary: In a server or client configuration with RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs)
enabled, and only the private key (with no associated certificate) configured locally,
a NULL pointer dereference may occur when the remote peer solicits raw public keys and
also sends the typically omitted "signature_algorithms_cert" TLS extension.
Impact summary: The impact is limited to a possible Denial of Service as a result of
an application abort, no data disclosure or remote command execution are possible.
CWE: CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference
Description: While a passing comment in sample code in the documentation suggests
that key-only RPK configurations are supported, the best-practice RPK configuration
is to always configure a corresponding certificate (possibly self-signed or
signed by any convenient CA).
When the private key is configured along with a matching certificate, the
"signature_algorithms_cert" extension is handled reliably even without the
fix, and peer clients or servers that don't support raw public keys may be
able to complete a TLS connection by pinning or verifying the corresponding
certificate or its public key.
Deployments that prefer to configure just a private key with no certificate
need to upgrade to an updated release as noted below.
FIPS impact: no
No FIPS modules are affected by this issue, as the SSL protocol implementation
is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version |
|---|
{
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "OpenSSL",
"vendor": "OpenSSL",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.6.4",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.5.8",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.4.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Issue summary: In a server or client configuration with RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs)\nenabled, and only the private key (with no associated certificate) configured locally,\na NULL pointer dereference may occur when the remote peer solicits raw public keys and\nalso sends the typically omitted \"signature_algorithms_cert\" TLS extension.\n\nImpact summary: The impact is limited to a possible Denial of Service as a result of\nan application abort, no data disclosure or remote command execution are possible.\n\nCWE: CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference\n\nDescription: While a passing comment in sample code in the documentation suggests\nthat key-only RPK configurations are supported, the best-practice RPK configuration\nis to always configure a corresponding certificate (possibly self-signed or\nsigned by any convenient CA).\n\nWhen the private key is configured along with a matching certificate, the\n\"signature_algorithms_cert\" extension is handled reliably even without the\nfix, and peer clients or servers that don\u0027t support raw public keys may be\nable to complete a TLS connection by pinning or verifying the corresponding\ncertificate or its public key.\n\nDeployments that prefer to configure just a private key with no certificate\nneed to upgrade to an updated release as noted below.\n\nFIPS impact: no\n\nNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue, as the SSL protocol implementation\nis outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-14457",
"lastModified": "2026-08-25T14:16:49.727",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"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"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 3.6,
"source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"type": "Secondary"
}
],
"ssvcV203": [
{
"source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"ssvcData": {
"id": "CVE-2026-14457",
"options": [
{
"exploitation": "none"
},
{
"automatable": "yes"
},
{
"technicalImpact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-08-25T14:13:25.034178Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
}
}
]
},
"published": "2026-08-25T13:17:49.533",
"references": [
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/1e8c398db67404babd3e5af999bb6bd86f720c76"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/581aaa0f0a35d214740f0fe1f5283ec41f1212e1"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/d0af20478688a6aa2f59d61caa3f82136b181d7f"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/dad836b071da6579510c968615848ba03cac593b"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260825.txt"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"vulnStatus": "Received",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-476"
}
],
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
Loading…
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…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Loading…
Loading…