RUSTSEC-2026-0349 (GHSA-W44R-93J7-QV28)

Vulnerability from osv_rustsec – Published: 2026-10-14 12:00 – Updated: 2026-10-14 13:17 – Source website
VLAI
Summary
Unauthenticated ServerHello can downgrade later connections to classical key exchange
Details

The client recorded the server-selected key exchange group for each server name when processing the ServerHello, before the server was authenticated. This record is used to predict which key share to send in future ClientHellos to that server name.

A network attacker can answer one connection attempt with a ServerHello selecting X25519, and then close the connection. Later ClientHellos for that name carry only an X25519 key share, while supported_groups still lists X25519MLKEM768 first. If the genuine server accepts that share rather than sending a HelloRetryRequest for its preferred hybrid group, the handshake completes with classical-only key exchange and no error. This persists for as long as the entry stays in the client's session store.

The impact is loss of post-quantum confidentiality for affected connections ("harvest now, decrypt later"). There is no key compromise and no authentication bypass.

The following are not affected:

  • connections to servers which send a HelloRetryRequest for their preferred group,
  • clients with resumption disabled (as nothing is stored), and
  • other server names.

This behaviour is discussed in draft-ietf-tls-key-share-prediction, so the practical impact depends largely on server policy.


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "categories": [
          "crypto-failure"
        ],
        "cvss": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
        "informational": null
      },
      "ecosystem_specific": {
        "affected_functions": null,
        "affects": {
          "arch": [],
          "functions": [],
          "os": []
        }
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "crates.io",
        "name": "rustls",
        "purl": "pkg:cargo/rustls"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.0.0-0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.23.46"
            }
          ],
          "type": "SEMVER"
        }
      ],
      "versions": []
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "GHSA-w44r-93j7-qv28"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "license": "CC0-1.0"
  },
  "details": "The client recorded the server-selected key exchange group for each server\nname when processing the ServerHello, before the server was authenticated.\nThis record is used to predict which key share to send in future ClientHellos\nto that server name.\n\nA network attacker can answer one connection attempt with a ServerHello\nselecting X25519, and then close the connection. Later ClientHellos for that\nname carry only an X25519 key share, while `supported_groups` still lists\nX25519MLKEM768 first. If the genuine server accepts that share rather than\nsending a HelloRetryRequest for its preferred hybrid group, the handshake\ncompletes with classical-only key exchange and no error. This persists for as\nlong as the entry stays in the client\u0027s session store.\n\nThe impact is loss of post-quantum confidentiality for affected connections\n(\"harvest now, decrypt later\"). There is no key compromise and no\nauthentication bypass.\n\nThe following are not affected:\n\n- connections to servers which send a HelloRetryRequest for their preferred group,\n- clients with resumption disabled (as nothing is stored), and\n- other server names.\n\nThis behaviour is discussed in\n[draft-ietf-tls-key-share-prediction](https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tls-key-share-prediction-01.html#name-security-considerations),\nso the practical impact depends largely on server policy.",
  "id": "RUSTSEC-2026-0349",
  "modified": "2026-10-14T13:17:45Z",
  "published": "2026-10-14T12:00:00Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://crates.io/crates/rustls"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0349.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rustls/rustls/pull/3355"
    }
  ],
  "related": [],
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Unauthenticated ServerHello can downgrade later connections to classical key exchange"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

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.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
Events included in the timeline

Loading timeline…


    Loading…

    Loading…

    Loading…

    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.