GHSA-8C75-8MHR-P7R9

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-22 21:17 – Updated: 2026-04-22 21:17
VLAI?
Summary
rust-openssl has incorrect bounds assertion in aes key wrap
Details

Summary

aes::unwrap_key() has an incorrect bounds assertion on the out buffer size, which can lead to out-of-bounds write.

Details

aes::unwrap_key() contains an incorrect assertion: it checks that out.len() + 8 <= in_.len(), but this condition is reversed. The intended invariant is out.len() >= in_.len() - 8, ensuring the output buffer is large enough.

Because of the inverted check, the function only accepts buffers at or below the minimum required size and rejects larger ones. If a smaller buffer is provided the function will write past the end of out by in_.len() - 8 - out.len() bytes, causing an out-of-bounds write from a safe public function.

Impact

Vulnerable applications using AES keywrap and allowing attacker controlled buffer sizes could have an attacker trigger an out-of-bounds write.

Severity ?
7.2 (High)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "crates.io",
        "name": "openssl"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.10.24"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.10.78"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-41678"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-787"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-22T21:17:32Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n``aes::unwrap_key()`` has an incorrect bounds assertion on the out buffer size, which can lead to out-of-bounds write.\n\n### Details\n``aes::unwrap_key()`` contains an incorrect assertion: it checks that `out.len() + 8 \u003c= in_.len()`, but this condition is reversed. The intended invariant is `out.len() \u003e= in_.len() - 8`, ensuring the output buffer is large enough.\n\nBecause of the inverted check, the function only accepts buffers at or below the minimum required size and rejects larger ones. If a smaller buffer is provided the function will write past the end of `out` by `in_.len() - 8 - out.len()` bytes, causing an out-of-bounds write from a safe public function.\n\n### Impact\nVulnerable applications using AES keywrap and allowing attacker controlled buffer sizes could have an attacker trigger an out-of-bounds write.",
  "id": "GHSA-8c75-8mhr-p7r9",
  "modified": "2026-04-22T21:17:32Z",
  "published": "2026-04-22T21:17:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rust-openssl/rust-openssl/security/advisories/GHSA-8c75-8mhr-p7r9"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rust-openssl/rust-openssl/pull/2604"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rust-openssl/rust-openssl/commit/718d07ff8ff7be417d5b7a6a0047f1607520b3b6"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/rust-openssl/rust-openssl"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rust-openssl/rust-openssl/releases/tag/openssl-v0.10.78"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "rust-openssl has incorrect bounds assertion in aes key wrap"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

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.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.