FKIE_CVE-2026-35188

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-06-09 17:17 - Updated: 2026-06-10 22:16
Summary
Issue summary: A malicious server can exploit TLS OCSP stapling by delivering a crafted response through the status_request extension, triggering a double-free in the client's certificate verification path. Impact summary: Successful exploitation allows an attacker to corrupt heap memory via a double-free, potentially leading to a Denial of Service or possibly an attacker controlled code execution or other undefined behavior. If OCSP stapling is enabled and the TLS client connects to a malicious server, a crafted OCSP stapled response can trigger a double free in the TLS client when the stapled response is checked. The OCSP stapling is not enabled by default. Reliable code execution through a double-free is technically complex and highly environment-dependent but the Denial of Service impact is straightforward to achieve, warranting Moderate severity. No FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version

{
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "Issue summary: A malicious server can exploit TLS OCSP stapling by delivering\na crafted response through the status_request extension, triggering a\ndouble-free in the client\u0027s certificate verification path.\n\nImpact summary: Successful exploitation allows an attacker to corrupt heap\nmemory via a double-free, potentially leading to a Denial of Service or\npossibly an attacker controlled code execution or other undefined behavior.\n\nIf OCSP stapling is enabled and the TLS client connects to a malicious server,\na crafted OCSP stapled response can trigger a double free in the TLS client\nwhen the stapled response is checked.\n\nThe OCSP stapling is not enabled by default. Reliable code execution\nthrough a double-free is technically complex and highly environment-dependent\nbut the Denial of Service impact is straightforward to achieve, warranting\nModerate severity.\n\nNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside\nthe OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-35188",
  "lastModified": "2026-06-10T22:16:56.973",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "LOW",
          "baseScore": 5.0,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
          "integrityImpact": "LOW",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 1.6,
        "impactScore": 3.4,
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-06-09T17:17:05.437",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
      "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/131145d25659e8749a9ed1afb383484854cffb78"
    },
    {
      "source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
      "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/78d0154cffda03aaaac63a087cc523a6b35fa8fd"
    },
    {
      "source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
      "url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260609.txt"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
  "vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-415"
        }
      ],
      "source": "openssl-security@openssl.org",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…