Common Weakness Enumeration
CWE-325
AllowedMissing Cryptographic Step
Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft
The product does not implement a required step in a cryptographic algorithm, resulting in weaker encryption than advertised by the algorithm.
91 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
CVE-2026-58638 (GCVE-0-2026-58638)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-07-14 17:10 – Updated: 2026-07-14 19:42
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Windows Boot Loader Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability
Summary
Missing cryptographic step in Windows Boot Loader allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally.
Severity
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerabi… | vendor-advisorypatch |
Impacted products
17 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft | Windows 10 Version 1809 |
Affected:
10.0.17763.0 , < 10.0.17763.9020
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 10 Version 21H2 |
Affected:
10.0.19044.0 , < 10.0.19044.7548
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 10 Version 22H2 |
Affected:
10.0.19045.0 , < 10.0.19045.7548
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 11 Version 24H2 |
Affected:
10.0.26100.0 , < 10.0.26100.8875
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 11 Version 25H2 |
Affected:
10.0.26200.0 , < 10.0.26100.8875
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 11 version 26H1 |
Affected:
10.0.28000.0 , < 10.0.28000.2525
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2012 |
Affected:
6.2.9200.0 , < 6.2.9200.26226
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2012 (Server Core installation) |
Affected:
6.2.9200.0 , < 6.2.9200.26226
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2012 R2 |
Affected:
6.3.9600.0 , < 6.3.9600.23291
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2012 R2 (Server Core installation) |
Affected:
6.3.9600.0 , < 6.3.9600.23291
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2016 |
Affected:
10.0.14393.0 , < 10.0.14393.9339
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2016 (Server Core installation) |
Affected:
10.0.14393.0 , < 10.0.14393.9339
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2019 |
Affected:
10.0.17763.0 , < 10.0.17763.9020
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2019 (Server Core installation) |
Affected:
10.0.17763.0 , < 10.0.17763.9020
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2022 |
Affected:
10.0.20348.0 , < 10.0.20348.5386
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2025 |
Affected:
10.0.26100.0 , < 10.0.26100.33158
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2025 (Server Core installation) |
Affected:
10.0.26100.0 , < 10.0.26100.33158
(custom)
|
Date Public
2026-07-14 14:00
{
"containers": {
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"platforms": [
"32-bit Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 10 Version 1809",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.17763.9020",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.17763.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"32-bit Systems",
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 10 Version 21H2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.19044.7548",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.19044.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"32-bit Systems",
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 10 Version 22H2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.19045.7548",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.19045.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 11 Version 24H2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.8875",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26100.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 11 Version 25H2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.8875",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26200.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 11 version 26H1",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.28000.2525",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.28000.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2012",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "6.2.9200.26226",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.2.9200.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2012 (Server Core installation)",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "6.2.9200.26226",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.2.9200.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2012 R2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "6.3.9600.23291",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.3.9600.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2012 R2 (Server Core installation)",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "6.3.9600.23291",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.3.9600.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2016",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.14393.9339",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.14393.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2016 (Server Core installation)",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.14393.9339",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.14393.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2019",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.17763.9020",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.17763.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2019 (Server Core installation)",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.17763.9020",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.17763.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2022",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.20348.5386",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.20348.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2025",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.33158",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26100.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2025 (Server Core installation)",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.33158",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26100.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"cpeApplicability": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10_1809:*:*:*:*:*:*:x86:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.17763.9020",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.17763.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.17763.9020",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.17763.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.17763.9020",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.17763.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2022:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.20348.5386",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.20348.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10_21H2:*:*:*:*:*:*:x86:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.19044.7548",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.19044.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10_22H2:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.19045.7548",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.19045.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2025:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.33158",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26100.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_11_25H2:*:*:*:*:*:*:arm64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.8875",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26200.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_11_24H2:*:*:*:*:*:*:arm64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.8875",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26100.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2025:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.33158",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26100.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_11_26H1:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.28000.2525",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.28000.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.14393.9339",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.14393.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.14393.9339",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.14393.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.2.9200.26226",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.2.9200.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.2.9200.26226",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.2.9200.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012_R2:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.3.9600.23291",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.3.9600.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012_R2:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.3.9600.23291",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.3.9600.0",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-07-14T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en-US",
"value": "Missing cryptographic step in Windows Boot Loader allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"baseScore": 6,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N/E:U/RL:O/RC:C",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en-US",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en-US",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-14T19:42:36.667Z",
"orgId": "f38d906d-7342-40ea-92c1-6c4a2c6478c8",
"shortName": "microsoft"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "Windows Boot Loader Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"patch"
],
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2026-58638"
}
],
"title": "Windows Boot Loader Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "f38d906d-7342-40ea-92c1-6c4a2c6478c8",
"assignerShortName": "microsoft",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-58638",
"datePublished": "2026-07-14T17:10:16.475Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-07-01T21:14:44.618Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-14T19:42:36.667Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-55144 (GCVE-0-2026-55144)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-07-14 17:05 – Updated: 2026-07-14 19:37
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Windows Cryptography API: Next Generation (CNG) Tampering Vulnerability
Summary
Missing cryptographic step in Windows CryptoAPI allows an authorized attacker to perform tampering locally.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerabi… | vendor-advisorypatch |
Impacted products
6 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft | Windows 11 Version 24H2 |
Affected:
10.0.26100.0 , < 10.0.26100.8875
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 11 Version 25H2 |
Affected:
10.0.26200.0 , < 10.0.26200.8875
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows 11 version 26H1 |
Affected:
10.0.28000.0 , < 10.0.28000.2525
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2022 |
Affected:
10.0.20348.0 , < 10.0.20348.5386
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2025 |
Affected:
10.0.26100.0 , < 10.0.26100.33158
(custom)
|
|
| Microsoft | Windows Server 2025 (Server Core installation) |
Affected:
10.0.26100.0 , < 10.0.26100.33158
(custom)
|
Date Public
2026-07-14 14:00
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-55144",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-07-14T17:44:58.629178Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-14T17:58:12.653Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"platforms": [
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 11 Version 24H2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.8875",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26100.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 11 Version 25H2",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26200.8875",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26200.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"ARM64-based Systems",
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows 11 version 26H1",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.28000.2525",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.28000.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2022",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.20348.5386",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.20348.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2025",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.33158",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26100.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"platforms": [
"x64-based Systems"
],
"product": "Windows Server 2025 (Server Core installation)",
"vendor": "Microsoft",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "10.0.26100.33158",
"status": "affected",
"version": "10.0.26100.0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"cpeApplicability": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2022:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.20348.5386",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.20348.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2025:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.33158",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26100.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_11_25H2:*:*:*:*:*:*:arm64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26200.8875",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26200.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_11_24H2:*:*:*:*:*:*:arm64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.8875",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26100.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2025:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.26100.33158",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.26100.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_11_26H1:*:*:*:*:*:*:x64:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "10.0.28000.2525",
"versionStartIncluding": "10.0.28000.0",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-07-14T14:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en-US",
"value": "Missing cryptographic step in Windows CryptoAPI allows an authorized attacker to perform tampering locally."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"baseScore": 7.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N/E:U/RL:O/RC:C",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en-US",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en-US",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-14T19:37:13.800Z",
"orgId": "f38d906d-7342-40ea-92c1-6c4a2c6478c8",
"shortName": "microsoft"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "Windows Cryptography API: Next Generation (CNG) Tampering Vulnerability",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory",
"patch"
],
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2026-55144"
}
],
"title": "Windows Cryptography API: Next Generation (CNG) Tampering Vulnerability"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "f38d906d-7342-40ea-92c1-6c4a2c6478c8",
"assignerShortName": "microsoft",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-55144",
"datePublished": "2026-07-14T17:05:06.598Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-06-16T15:03:49.682Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-14T19:37:13.800Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-49440 (GCVE-0-2026-49440)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-23 17:13 – Updated: 2026-06-25 13:48
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Deno: Miller-Rabin Primality Test Allows Zero Rounds
Summary
Deno is a JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly runtime. Prior to 2.8.1, node:crypto.checkPrime(candidate[, options][, callback]) and crypto.checkPrimeSync(candidate[, options]) ran no Miller-Rabin rounds at all when the caller left options.checks at its default of 0. In that mode, the only test applied to the candidate was trial division by the primes up to 17,863. Any composite whose smallest prime factor exceeds that bound — for example the product of two primes just above it, such as 17,881 × 17,891 — was reported as true ("probably prime"). The same divergence affected the lower-level op_node_check_prime / op_node_check_prime_bytes paths that the polyfill calls into. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.8.1.
Severity
7.4 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/denoland/deno/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/denoland/deno/pull/34391 | x_refsource_MISC |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-49440",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-25T03:55:49.551538Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-25T13:48:28.573Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "deno",
"vendor": "denoland",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.8.1"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Deno is a JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly runtime. Prior to 2.8.1, node:crypto.checkPrime(candidate[, options][, callback]) and crypto.checkPrimeSync(candidate[, options]) ran no Miller-Rabin rounds at all when the caller left options.checks at its default of 0. In that mode, the only test applied to the candidate was trial division by the primes up to 17,863. Any composite whose smallest prime factor exceeds that bound \u2014 for example the product of two primes just above it, such as 17,881 \u00d7 17,891 \u2014 was reported as true (\"probably prime\"). The same divergence affected the lower-level op_node_check_prime / op_node_check_prime_bytes paths that the polyfill calls into. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.8.1."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 7.4,
"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:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-23T17:13:25.052Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/security/advisories/GHSA-9xg4-qhm4-g43w",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/security/advisories/GHSA-9xg4-qhm4-g43w"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/pull/34391",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/pull/34391"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-9xg4-qhm4-g43w",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Deno: Miller-Rabin Primality Test Allows Zero Rounds"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-49440",
"datePublished": "2026-06-23T17:13:25.052Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-30T02:43:33.105Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-25T13:48:28.573Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-48480 (GCVE-0-2026-48480)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-04 17:39 – Updated: 2026-06-04 18:42
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
netty-incubator-codec-ohttp OHttpVersionChunkDraft's Missing Final-Chunk Enforcement Leads to Undetected Stream Truncation
Summary
The netty incubator codec.bhttp is a java language binary http parser. Prior to version 0.0.22.FInal, the codec-ohttp implementation of draft-ietf-ohai-chunked-ohttp does not verify that a cryptographically-signed final chunk was received before the outer HTTP body terminates. An on-path adversary (the OHTTP relay itself, or any MITM on the relay↔gateway or relay↔client transport) can forward a prefix of a legitimate chunked-OHTTP message—cut at a non-final chunk boundary—and close the outer body cleanly, producing no decryption error and no exception in the receiving application. Version 0.0.22.Final fixes the issue.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/netty/netty-incubator-codec-oh… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/netty/netty-incubator-codec-oh… | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| netty | netty-incubator-codec-ohttp |
Affected:
< 0.0.22.Final
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-48480",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-04T18:42:03.965547Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-04T18:42:22.003Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "netty-incubator-codec-ohttp",
"vendor": "netty",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 0.0.22.Final"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "The netty incubator codec.bhttp is a java language binary http parser. Prior to version 0.0.22.FInal, the codec-ohttp implementation of draft-ietf-ohai-chunked-ohttp does not verify that a cryptographically-signed final chunk was received before the outer HTTP body terminates. An on-path adversary (the OHTTP relay itself, or any MITM on the relay\u2194gateway or relay\u2194client transport) can forward a prefix of a legitimate chunked-OHTTP message\u2014cut at a non-final chunk boundary\u2014and close the outer body cleanly, producing no decryption error and no exception in the receiving application. Version 0.0.22.Final fixes the issue."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 6.6,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-04T17:39:40.252Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/netty/netty-incubator-codec-ohttp/security/advisories/GHSA-r6fj-869h-4f6q",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/netty/netty-incubator-codec-ohttp/security/advisories/GHSA-r6fj-869h-4f6q"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/netty/netty-incubator-codec-ohttp/commit/28f977f293591a4e837bd59ceb441f9f70349915",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/netty/netty-incubator-codec-ohttp/commit/28f977f293591a4e837bd59ceb441f9f70349915"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-r6fj-869h-4f6q",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "netty-incubator-codec-ohttp OHttpVersionChunkDraft\u0027s Missing Final-Chunk Enforcement Leads to Undetected Stream Truncation"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-48480",
"datePublished": "2026-06-04T17:39:40.252Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-21T15:33:08.290Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-04T18:42:22.003Z",
"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
VEX
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
{
"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-2026-45445 (GCVE-0-2026-45445)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
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
{
"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-2026-42770 (GCVE-0-2026-42770)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-09 16:03 – Updated: 2026-06-10 07:48
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
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
{
"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-2026-41395 (GCVE-0-2026-41395)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-04-28 18:09 – Updated: 2026-04-29 13:27 X_Open Source
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
OpenClaw < 2026.3.28 - Webhook Replay via Query Parameter Reordering in Plivo V3
Summary
OpenClaw before 2026.3.28 contains a webhook replay vulnerability in Plivo V3 signature verification that canonicalizes query ordering for signatures but hashes raw URLs for replay detection. Attackers can reorder query parameters to bypass replay cache detection and trigger duplicate voice-call processing with a captured valid signed webhook.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/adv… | vendor-advisory |
| https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-web… | third-party-advisory |
Impacted products
Date Public
2026-03-29 00:00
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-41395",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-04-29T13:20:49.244265Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-29T13:27:00.547Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"packageURL": "pkg:npm/openclaw",
"product": "OpenClaw",
"vendor": "OpenClaw",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "2026.3.28",
"status": "affected",
"version": "0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "2026.3.28",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"cpeApplicability": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:openclaw:openclaw:*:*:*:*:*:node.js:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "2026.3.28",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "zsx (@zsxsoft)"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "KeenSecurityLab"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-03-29T00:00:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "OpenClaw before 2026.3.28 contains a webhook replay vulnerability in Plivo V3 signature verification that canonicalizes query ordering for signatures but hashes raw URLs for replay detection. Attackers can reorder query parameters to bypass replay cache detection and trigger duplicate voice-call processing with a captured valid signed webhook."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 8.2,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
},
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-28T18:09:54.896Z",
"orgId": "83251b91-4cc7-4094-a5c7-464a1b83ea10",
"shortName": "VulnCheck"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-8689-gm9g-jgr6)",
"tags": [
"vendor-advisory"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-8689-gm9g-jgr6"
},
{
"name": "VulnCheck Advisory: OpenClaw \u003c 2026.3.28 - Webhook Replay via Query Parameter Reordering in Plivo V3",
"tags": [
"third-party-advisory"
],
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-webhook-replay-via-query-parameter-reordering-in-plivo-v3"
}
],
"tags": [
"x_open-source"
],
"title": "OpenClaw \u003c 2026.3.28 - Webhook Replay via Query Parameter Reordering in Plivo V3",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "vulncheck"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "83251b91-4cc7-4094-a5c7-464a1b83ea10",
"assignerShortName": "VulnCheck",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-41395",
"datePublished": "2026-04-28T18:09:54.896Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-04-20T14:13:45.349Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-29T13:27:00.547Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29142 (GCVE-0-2026-29142)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-04-02 08:44 – Updated: 2026-04-02 13:31
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Plaintext secure-mail.html
Summary
SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway before version 15.0.3 allows an attacker to forge a GINA-encrypted email.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://downloads.seppmail.com/extrelnotes/150/ER… | release-notes |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SEPPmail | Secure Email Gateway |
Affected:
0 , < 15.0.3
(custom)
|
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29142",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-04-02T13:21:07.474508Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-02T13:31:40.126Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "Secure Email Gateway",
"vendor": "SEPPmail",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "15.0.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "0",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"cpeApplicability": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:seppmail:seppmail_secure_email_gateway:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionEndExcluding": "15.0.3",
"versionStartIncluding": "0",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "Andris Suter-D\u00f6rig"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "coordinator",
"value": "Matteo Scarlata"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "coordinator",
"value": "Kenny Paterson"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway before version 15.0.3 allows an attacker to forge a GINA-encrypted email."
}
],
"value": "SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway before version 15.0.3 allows an attacker to forge a GINA-encrypted email."
}
],
"impacts": [
{
"capecId": "CAPEC-194",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CAPEC-194 Fake the Source of Data"
}
]
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 6.3,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325 Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-02T08:44:51.968Z",
"orgId": "455daabc-a392-441d-aa46-37d35189897c",
"shortName": "NCSC.ch"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"release-notes"
],
"url": "https://downloads.seppmail.com/extrelnotes/150/ERN15.0.html#seppmail-vulnerability-disclosure-1503"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "EXTERNAL"
},
"timeline": [
{
"lang": "en",
"time": "2025-10-31T14:22:00.000Z",
"value": "Vulnerability disclosed to SEPPmail"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"time": "2026-03-03T00:00:00.000Z",
"value": "Version 15.0.3 released"
}
],
"title": "Plaintext secure-mail.html",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.5.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "455daabc-a392-441d-aa46-37d35189897c",
"assignerShortName": "NCSC.ch",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29142",
"datePublished": "2026-04-02T08:44:51.968Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-04T09:08:07.342Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-02T13:31:40.126Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-22863 (GCVE-0-2026-22863)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-01-15 22:53 – Updated: 2026-01-16 17:16
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Deno node:crypto doesn't finalize cipher
Summary
Deno is a JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly runtime. Before 2.6.0, node:crypto doesn't finalize cipher. The vulnerability allows an attacker to have infinite encryptions. This can lead to naive attempts at brute forcing, as well as more refined attacks with the goal to learn the server secrets. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.6.0.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-325 - Missing Cryptographic Step
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/denoland/deno/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/denoland/deno/releases/tag/v2.6.0 | x_refsource_MISC |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-22863",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-01-16T17:16:21.456450Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-01-16T17:16:41.355Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "deno",
"vendor": "denoland",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.6.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Deno is a JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly runtime. Before 2.6.0, node:crypto doesn\u0027t finalize cipher. The vulnerability allows an attacker to have infinite encryptions. This can lead to naive attempts at brute forcing, as well as more refined attacks with the goal to learn the server secrets. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.6.0."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 9.2,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-325",
"description": "CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-01-15T22:53:15.357Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/security/advisories/GHSA-5379-f5hf-w38v",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/security/advisories/GHSA-5379-f5hf-w38v"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/releases/tag/v2.6.0",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/denoland/deno/releases/tag/v2.6.0"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-5379-f5hf-w38v",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Deno node:crypto doesn\u0027t finalize cipher"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-22863",
"datePublished": "2026-01-15T22:53:15.357Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-01-12T16:20:16.746Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-01-16T17:16:41.355Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-68: Subvert Code-signing Facilities
Many languages use code signing facilities to vouch for code's identity and to thus tie code to its assigned privileges within an environment. Subverting this mechanism can be instrumental in an attacker escalating privilege. Any means of subverting the way that a virtual machine enforces code signing classifies for this style of attack.