FKIE_CVE-2026-63072
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-08-25 13:19 - Updated: 2026-08-25 15:16
Severity
Summary
Issue summary: OpenSSL CMS decryption sizes the key-unwrap output buffer based
on querying the unwrapped key size, but the AES-WRAP-PAD unwrap primitive
can write and cleanse more bytes than that query reports, causing an 8-byte
out-of-bounds heap write.
Impact summary: An attacker who supplies a crafted CMS message can trigger a
deterministic 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write when the victim decrypts it
with CMS_decrypt(), corrupting the heap and typically resulting in a Denial
of Service.
CWE: CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write
Description: The key-wrap OID is potentially attacker-controlled on the wire.
CMS unwrapping allows both id-aesNNN-wrap-pad and id-aesNNN-wrap ciphers.
An attacker can take a legitimate message and change a single OID byte to
select the padded variant while leaving the message otherwise valid. Since
the unwrap key is derived from the recipient's private operation (ECDH key
agreement or ML-KEM decapsulation), the RFC 5649 integrity check cannot
pass, and the decryption fails with integrity failure.
The write is a fixed-size (8-byte), fixed-value (zero) heap overflow
immediately past the allocation, requires no special configuration, and is
reachable from the public CMS_decrypt() function. The consequence is
a heap corruption leading to a Denial of Service. The fix in the CMS code
sizes the unwrap output buffer for the worst case so a failed unwrap cannot
write past the allocation.
FIPS impact: no
As the CMS code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS
modules are affected by this CVE.
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"
},
{
"lessThan": "3.0.22",
"status": "affected",
"version": "3.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThan": "1.1.1zi",
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.1.1",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Issue summary: OpenSSL CMS decryption sizes the key-unwrap output buffer based\non querying the unwrapped key size, but the AES-WRAP-PAD unwrap primitive\ncan write and cleanse more bytes than that query reports, causing an 8-byte\nout-of-bounds heap write.\n\nImpact summary: An attacker who supplies a crafted CMS message can trigger a\ndeterministic 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write when the victim decrypts it\nwith CMS_decrypt(), corrupting the heap and typically resulting in a Denial\nof Service.\n\nCWE: CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write\n\nDescription: The key-wrap OID is potentially attacker-controlled on the wire.\nCMS unwrapping allows both id-aesNNN-wrap-pad and id-aesNNN-wrap ciphers.\nAn attacker can take a legitimate message and change a single OID byte to\nselect the padded variant while leaving the message otherwise valid. Since\nthe unwrap key is derived from the recipient\u0027s private operation (ECDH key\nagreement or ML-KEM decapsulation), the RFC 5649 integrity check cannot\npass, and the decryption fails with integrity failure.\n\nThe write is a fixed-size (8-byte), fixed-value (zero) heap overflow\nimmediately past the allocation, requires no special configuration, and is\nreachable from the public CMS_decrypt() function. The consequence is\na heap corruption leading to a Denial of Service. The fix in the CMS code\nsizes the unwrap output buffer for the worst case so a failed unwrap cannot\nwrite past the allocation.\n\nFIPS impact: no\n\nAs the CMS code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS\nmodules are affected by this CVE."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-63072",
"lastModified": "2026-08-25T15:16:36.060",
"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-2026-63072",
"options": [
{
"exploitation": "none"
},
{
"automatable": "yes"
},
{
"technicalImpact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-08-25T14:29:50.344129Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
}
}
]
},
"published": "2026-08-25T13:19:26.010",
"references": [
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/2a3dac874c8057c1f0186849bf1ede1ae7b6b756"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/87784ad619af36b8807c2044b3940006fccc1e42"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/9530a5fd1aacaeccdced4478ea2340a480613335"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/9ec2f6d2ae2bcad907cf7ee38584855bafe4979a"
},
{
"source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
"url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a0c8ec557d9cac078f032d76cdf684fe743eb382"
},
{
"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-787"
}
],
"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…