CGA-9HQF-JC89-W38W: openssl
Unknown
Published Date unknownLast modified Date unknown
Status not reported
The data service did not report a status for this record. Only the available sections are shown.Vulnerability summary
CGA-9HQF-JC89-W38W is a vulnerability in openssl with no CVSS score yet.
Priority
Insufficient evidence
No CVSS vector published; no exploitation reported by the 5 checked sources
Source freshness unavailable
How is this decided?CVSS score
Not scored
010
No CVSS score recordedEPSS scoreNot scoredRisk metrics not yet published.
KEVNot listedNot listed by any tracked catalog.
RansomwareNot flaggedNo ransomware use recorded.
Public exploits0No public exploits recorded
Advisory lineage
Upstream 0 · Downstream 0 · Related 1Timeline
No timeline events recorded.
Description
No description has been published for this record.
CVSS metrics
Risk metrics not yet published.
EPSS trend
No EPSS score has been published for this record yet.
Known exploited
Compare KEV catalogs
CISA KEVNot in the CISA KEV catalog.
ENISA CNWNot in the ENISA CNW catalog.
CIRCLNot in the CIRCL catalog.
Public exploits
0 foundNo public exploits indexed.
Weaknesses
CWE · root causeNo weakness data has been published for this record.
Affected systems
Version check
Known conditions: not stated in public data.
Chainguard3 products
- libcrypto3-2.34< 3.6.1-r0
- openssl< 3.6.1-r0
- openssl-provider-fips-3.6.0All versions (No fix recorded)
Wolfi1 product
- openssl< 3.6.1-r0
2 vendors · 4 products
References
0 linksNo references have been published for this record.
Related vulnerabilities
PrioritiseCVE-2026-84784openssl +20 moreQUIC: Unbounded RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID BacklogIssue summary: A malicious remote peer may flood the local QUIC
stack with NEW_CONNECTION_ID frames by avoiding a limit check on
how many connection IDs the remote QUIC stack can use.
Impact summary: The local QUIC stack sends a RETIRE_CONN_ID frame
for every NEW_CONNECTION_ID frame it receives. The RETIRE_CONN_ID
frame is dispatched via the Control Frame Queue (CFQ). If the remote
peer also withholds ACKs, then it can force the local stack
to allocate ~400MB (depending on ACK delay).
CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Description: RFC 9000 sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 [1] describe the mechanism
by which a remote peer can notify the local QUIC stack to change the
destination connection ID (a.k.a. CID) the local stack uses to
identify the connection at the remote peer. Each CID is associated
with a sequence number. The sequence number is transmitted
in NEW_CONNECTION_ID and RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames to identify the CID
which is being either associated with a connection or retired.
The remote peer sends a NEW_CONNECTION_ID frame to let the local stack know
a new CID is being associated with an existing connection. The
NEW_CONNECTION_ID frame carries the new CID, its sequence number, and the
retire-prior-to number. The retire-prior-to identifies existing
CIDs that are to be retired. The local QUIC stack must send a
RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID for every destination CID whose sequence number
is less than retire-prior-to. The CID becomes retired after the
local stack receives an ACK for its RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame.
Although the OpenSSL QUIC stack supports at most one destination CID
for every connection, it can be tricked into processing more than
one RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame per connection. The OpenSSL QUIC
stack currently retires the destination CID as soon as it receives
the NEW_CONNECTION_ID, while in fact the destination CID must
be retired after an ACK for the RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame is received.
Correcting the flawed logic also fixes the backlog growth.
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9000#name-issuing-connection-ids
FIPS impact: no
The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of
the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.CVSS7.5HighEPSS0.61%PrioritiseCVE-2026-84782openssl +36 moreDTLS Retransmits Handshake Messages From a Stale Buffer OffsetIssue summary: The DTLS retransmission logic does not correctly handle
a handshake message write that is suspended part-way through.
The retransmitted message can be read past the message buffer and
the retransmission overwrites the internal state the suspended write
needs to resume correctly.
Impact summary: The retransmitted message can disclose a heap memory
to the peer as plaintext handshake data or cause a crash and a Denial
of Service when the read reaches an unmapped memory region.
CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read
Description: DTLS handshake messages can be written out in multiple
fragments, and a write can suspend mid-message (returning WANT_WRITE)
if the underlying transport temporarily cannot accept more data. While
such a write is suspended, the DTLS retransmission timer may
independently fire and ask the retransmission logic to resend an
earlier, already-acknowledged-as-sent message from its retransmit
queue.
The retransmission logic reused the same internal buffer and position
tracking as the message that was still being written, without
resetting the position back to the start of the message being
retransmitted. As a result the retransmission was read starting from
wherever the suspended write had left off, producing a mislabelled
message whose body was leftover bytes from the other, larger message
still in flight - content that was never meant to be sent at that
point, and which could run past the end of the allocated buffer.
Separately, even when the retransmission is positioned correctly,
allowing it to run to completion while another write is suspended
overwrites the same shared bookkeeping that the suspended write
depends on to resume. When the application later resumes the
suspended write (via a subsequent SSL_read(), SSL_write(),
SSL_accept(), or SSL_connect() call), it finds that bookkeeping in a
state inconsistent with the message and aborts the process in
a debugging build.
The fix resets the retransmission's read position to the start of the
message before resending, and skips retransmission entirely whenever a
handshake write is still suspended, deferring to the next call that
resumes it instead.
FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.CVSS8.2HighEPSS0.83%RoutineCVE-2026-77696openssl +22 moreTiming Side-Channel in SM2 Signature GenerationIssue summary: SM2 signature generation uses non-constant-time arithmetic
on secret values, forming a timing side-channel.
Impact summary: An attacker able to measure SM2 signing times may learn
information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures
can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the
private key.
CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy
Description: SM2 signature generation computes the signature value using
variable-time BIGNUM operations on the secret nonce and the private key, so
the time taken to produce an SM2 signature depends on these secret values,
forming a timing side-channel.
Applications performing SM2 signature generation are affected on all
platforms.
FIPS Impact: no
SM2 is not a FIPS algorithm.CVSS3.7LowEPSS0.40%RoutineCVE-2026-75806openssl +22 moreUnauthenticated and Undersized DTLS 1.2 AEAD Record Causes DoSIssue summary: An established DTLS 1.2 association using an AEAD cipher suite
can be terminated by a single unauthenticated datagram whose encrypted
fragment is shorter than the mandatory explicit IV and authentication tag
overhead.
Impact summary: An attacker who can send a datagram that is routed to an
existing DTLS 1.2 association can tear that association down without knowing
any key material. This is a Denial of Service limited to the targeted
association. There is no memory safety or confidentiality impact.
CWE: CWE-1284: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input
Description: In TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 every record protected by an AEAD cipher
suite carries an explicit IV followed by the ciphertext and an authentication
tag. When decrypting such a record the record layer passed the record length to
the cipher implementation before checking that the record was long enough to
contain the explicit IV and the tag. For a record shorter than that overhead the
cipher implementation rejected the impossible length, and the record layer
treated this as an internal failure and raised a fatal internal_error alert
instead of treating the record as one that failed authentication.
In TLS 1.2 the same record causes a fatal internal_error alert instead of the
expected bad_record_mac alert. Since any undecryptable record already
terminates a TLS connection, this is a protocol conformance issue rather than
a security issue in TLS.
The fix validates the record length against the explicit IV and tag length
before any AEAD processing, so that TLS reports bad_record_mac and DTLS
silently discards the record.
FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.CVSS5.3MediumEPSS1.10%RoutineCVE-2026-75805openssl +21 moreNULL Pointer Dereference in CMP Client Revocation Response HandlingIssue summary: A CMP client that requests certificate revocation on the basis
of a PKCS#10 CSR may dereference a NULL pointer and terminate abnormally when
processing a crafted revocation response.
Impact summary: The NULL pointer dereference happens on a read which
leads to a crash and a Denial of Service for the affected client application.
CWE: CWE-476: NULL-pointer dereference
Description: A CMP client revoking a certificate has to tell the server which
certificate to revoke, and may do so by supplying a PKCS#10 CSR instead of the
certificate itself or its issuer name and serial number. This is
'openssl cmp -cmd rr -csr <file>' on the command line, or
OSSL_CMP_exec_RR_ses() with the certificate supplied via
OSSL_CMP_CTX_set1_p10CSR() through the API.
A CSR does not contain the issuer name and serial number of the certificate,
so the client does not send them. A server may optionally name the
certificate it revoked in its response, and the client then compares that
name against what it sent. Having sent neither an issuer name nor a serial
number, it has nothing to compare against, and a server returning a specially
crafted name causes the client to read from a NULL pointer and crash.
The revocation response is checked for valid message protection before
the affected code is reached, so an attacker must be a malicious or
compromised CMP server, or a man-in-the-middle in possession of the
secret used for message protection. Clients that identify the certificate
to be revoked by a certificate or by issuer and serial number rather
than by a PKCS#10 CSR are not affected.
FIPS impact: no
No FIPS modules are affected by this issue, as the CMP protocol
implementation is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.CVSS5.3MediumEPSS0.32%RoutineCVE-2026-75804openssl +20 moreQUIC Connection-Level Flow Control is Not Enforced for StreamsIssue summary: OpenSSL QUIC stack does not enforce connection
level flow control for streams. Remote peers may send more bytes
as long as they fit within the stream flow control limits.
Impact summary: A malicious remote peer may exploit the lack of connection
flow control for streams to make the QUIC stack receive ~100MB of memory
instead of 768 KiB (default flow control window size).
CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Description: The local QUIC stack advertises two flow control limits
to its remote peer: stream flow control limit and connection flow
control limit. The remote peer must follow both limits when transmitting
stream data.
Whenever the local QUIC stack receives a stream frame, it validates
that the size of the received stream frame stays within flow control limits.
If either limit is exceeded (stream level or connection level), then
the QUIC stack must close the connection with a flow control error.
The vulnerable OpenSSL QUIC stack enforces the stream-level but not
the connection-level limit. To exploit the issue, three conditions must be met:
- the remote peer opens several streams
- each stream must stay within the stream-level flow control limit
- there must be no zero-offset byte sent on any of the streams
(to prevent the vulnerable QUIC stack from consuming data).
By meeting the conditions above, the remote peer may make the local stack
allocate 2 x MAX_STREAMS x (stream flow control limit) bytes
of memory. MAX_STREAMS defaults to 100, and the limit applies to both
bidirectional and unidirectional streams, making it 200 in total. The default
flow control window for a stream is 512kB. The remote peer may
force the vulnerable QUIC stack to allocate 100MB of heap per connection.
FIPS impact: no
The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of
the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.CVSS5.3MediumEPSS0.53%