Search Results (92 CVEs found)

CVE Vendors Products Updated CVSS v3.1
CVE-2026-45446 1 Openssl 1 Openssl 2026-06-16 4.8 Medium
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.
CVE-2026-9266 1 Moxa 1 Uc-1200a Series 2026-06-12 N/A
A Missing Required Cryptographic Step vulnerability has been identified in Moxa's embedded Linux firmware for industrial computers and controllers. This vulnerability represents an incomplete remediation of CVE-2026-0714. The firmware introduced TPM2 parameter encryption as a countermeasure against CVE-2026-0714. However, an omission in the authorization session configuration causes the parameter encryption to provide no effective protection. An attacker with invasive physical access to the device can still capture TPM communications on the SPI bus and derive the LUKS disk encryption key in plaintext. While successful exploitation results in full compromise of the encrypted disk volume, the attack requires invasive physical access, including opening the device and attaching external equipment to the SPI bus. Remote exploitation is not possible, and the attack does not affect any downstream systems.
CVE-2026-0420 1 Netgear 10 Rax120, Rax120 Firmware, Rax120v1 and 7 more 2026-06-11 5.9 Medium
An improper implementation of TLS certificate validation vulnerability found in NETGEAR's ReadyCloud client app which could allow an attacker to perform attacker-in-the-middle (MiTM) style attacks impacting the product's confidentiality. This vulnerability affects the listed NETGEAR models.
CVE-2024-43547 1 Microsoft 25 Windows 10 1507, Windows 10 1607, Windows 10 1809 and 22 more 2026-06-09 6.5 Medium
Windows Kerberos Information Disclosure Vulnerability
CVE-2026-2673 2 Openssl, Siemens 3 Openssl, Simatic Cn 4100, Simatic Cn 4100 Firmware 2026-06-05 6.5 Medium
Issue summary: An OpenSSL TLS 1.3 server may fail to negotiate the expected preferred key exchange group when its key exchange group configuration includes the default by using the 'DEFAULT' keyword. Impact summary: A less preferred key exchange may be used even when a more preferred group is supported by both client and server, if the group was not included among the client's initial predicated keyshares. This will sometimes be the case with the new hybrid post-quantum groups, if the client chooses to defer their use until specifically requested by the server. If an OpenSSL TLS 1.3 server's configuration uses the 'DEFAULT' keyword to interpolate the built-in default group list into its own configuration, perhaps adding or removing specific elements, then an implementation defect causes the 'DEFAULT' list to lose its 'tuple' structure, and all server-supported groups were treated as a single sufficiently secure 'tuple', with the server not sending a Hello Retry Request (HRR) even when a group in a more preferred tuple was mutually supported. As a result, the client and server might fail to negotiate a mutually supported post-quantum key agreement group, such as 'X25519MLKEM768', if the client's configuration results in only 'classical' groups (such as 'X25519' being the only ones in the client's initial keyshare prediction). OpenSSL 3.5 and later support a new syntax for selecting the most preferred TLS 1.3 key agreement group on TLS servers. The old syntax had a single 'flat' list of groups, and treated all the supported groups as sufficiently secure. If any of the keyshares predicted by the client were supported by the server the most preferred among these was selected, even if other groups supported by the client, but not included in the list of predicted keyshares would have been more preferred, if included. The new syntax partitions the groups into distinct 'tuples' of roughly equivalent security. Within each tuple the most preferred group included among the client's predicted keyshares is chosen, but if the client supports a group from a more preferred tuple, but did not predict any corresponding keyshares, the server will ask the client to retry the ClientHello (by issuing a Hello Retry Request or HRR) with the most preferred mutually supported group. The above works as expected when the server's configuration uses the built-in default group list, or explicitly defines its own list by directly defining the various desired groups and group 'tuples'. No OpenSSL FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the code in question lies outside the FIPS boundary. OpenSSL 3.6 and 3.5 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 3.6 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.2 once it is released. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.6 once it is released. OpenSSL 3.4, 3.3, 3.0, 1.0.2 and 1.1.1 are not affected by this issue.
CVE-2025-49600 2 Mbed, Trustedfirmware 2 Mbedtls, Mbed Tls 2026-06-05 4.9 Medium
In MbedTLS 3.3.0 before 3.6.4, mbedtls_lms_verify may accept invalid signatures if hash computation fails and internal errors go unchecked, enabling LMS (Leighton-Micali Signature) forgery in a fault scenario. Specifically, unchecked return values in mbedtls_lms_verify allow an attacker (who can induce a hardware hash accelerator fault) to bypass LMS signature verification by reusing stale stack data, resulting in acceptance of an invalid signature. In mbedtls_lms_verify, the return values of the internal Merkle tree functions create_merkle_leaf_value and create_merkle_internal_value are not checked. These functions return an integer that indicates whether the call succeeded or not. If a failure occurs, the output buffer (Tc_candidate_root_node) may remain uninitialized, and the result of the signature verification is unpredictable. When the software implementation of SHA-256 is used, these functions will not fail. However, with hardware-accelerated hashing, an attacker could use fault injection against the accelerator to bypass verification.
CVE-2026-7666 1 Djangoproject 1 Django 2026-06-05 3.1 Low
An issue was discovered in Django 6.0 before 6.0.6 and 5.2 before 5.2.15. `django.core.mail.backends.smtp.EmailBackend` in Django fails to prevent reuse of a partially-initialized connection after a failed `STARTTLS` handshake when `fail_silently=True`, which allows on-path network attackers to read email content via cleartext interception. Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.0.x, 4.1.x, and 3.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Kasper Dupont for reporting this issue.
CVE-2026-48480 1 Netty 1 Netty-incubator-codec-ohttp 2026-06-05 N/A
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.
CVE-2026-42246 1 Ruby-lang 2 Net::imap, Net\ 2026-05-18 7.4 High
Net::IMAP implements Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) client functionality in Ruby. Prior to versions 0.3.10, 0.4.24, 0.5.14, and 0.6.4, a man-in-the-middle attacker can cause Net::IMAP#starttls to return "successfully", without starting TLS. This issue has been patched in versions 0.3.10, 0.4.24, 0.5.14, and 0.6.4.
CVE-2025-69418 1 Openssl 1 Openssl 2026-05-12 4 Medium
Issue summary: When using the low-level OCB API directly with AES-NI or<br>other hardware-accelerated code paths, inputs whose length is not a multiple<br>of 16 bytes can leave the final partial block unencrypted and unauthenticated.<br><br>Impact summary: The trailing 1-15 bytes of a message may be exposed in<br>cleartext on encryption and are not covered by the authentication tag,<br>allowing an attacker to read or tamper with those bytes without detection.<br><br>The low-level OCB encrypt and decrypt routines in the hardware-accelerated<br>stream path process full 16-byte blocks but do not advance the input/output<br>pointers. The subsequent tail-handling code then operates on the original<br>base pointers, effectively reprocessing the beginning of the buffer while<br>leaving the actual trailing bytes unprocessed. The authentication checksum<br>also excludes the true tail bytes.<br><br>However, typical OpenSSL consumers using EVP are not affected because the<br>higher-level EVP and provider OCB implementations split inputs so that full<br>blocks and trailing partial blocks are processed in separate calls, avoiding<br>the problematic code path. Additionally, TLS does not use OCB ciphersuites.<br>The vulnerability only affects applications that call the low-level<br>CRYPTO_ocb128_encrypt() or CRYPTO_ocb128_decrypt() functions directly with<br>non-block-aligned lengths in a single call on hardware-accelerated builds.<br>For these reasons the issue was assessed as Low severity.<br><br>The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected<br>by this issue, as OCB mode is not a FIPS-approved algorithm.<br><br>OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.0 and 1.1.1 are vulnerable to this issue.<br><br>OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not affected by this issue.
CVE-2023-5678 2 Openssl, Redhat 5 Openssl, Enterprise Linux, Jboss Core Services and 2 more 2026-05-12 5.3 Medium
Issue summary: Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service. While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817), DH_check_pub_key() doesn't make any of these checks, and is therefore vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters. Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large P, it doesn't check for an excessively large Q. An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the "-pubcheck" option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.
CVE-2023-5363 4 Debian, Netapp, Openssl and 1 more 16 Debian Linux, H300s, H300s Firmware and 13 more 2026-05-12 7.5 High
Issue summary: A bug has been identified in the processing of key and initialisation vector (IV) lengths. This can lead to potential truncation or overruns during the initialisation of some symmetric ciphers. Impact summary: A truncation in the IV can result in non-uniqueness, which could result in loss of confidentiality for some cipher modes. When calling EVP_EncryptInit_ex2(), EVP_DecryptInit_ex2() or EVP_CipherInit_ex2() the provided OSSL_PARAM array is processed after the key and IV have been established. Any alterations to the key length, via the "keylen" parameter or the IV length, via the "ivlen" parameter, within the OSSL_PARAM array will not take effect as intended, potentially causing truncation or overreading of these values. The following ciphers and cipher modes are impacted: RC2, RC4, RC5, CCM, GCM and OCB. For the CCM, GCM and OCB cipher modes, truncation of the IV can result in loss of confidentiality. For example, when following NIST's SP 800-38D section 8.2.1 guidance for constructing a deterministic IV for AES in GCM mode, truncation of the counter portion could lead to IV reuse. Both truncations and overruns of the key and overruns of the IV will produce incorrect results and could, in some cases, trigger a memory exception. However, these issues are not currently assessed as security critical. Changing the key and/or IV lengths is not considered to be a common operation and the vulnerable API was recently introduced. Furthermore it is likely that application developers will have spotted this problem during testing since decryption would fail unless both peers in the communication were similarly vulnerable. For these reasons we expect the probability of an application being vulnerable to this to be quite low. However if an application is vulnerable then this issue is considered very serious. For these reasons we have assessed this issue as Moderate severity overall. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this because the issue lies outside of the FIPS provider boundary. OpenSSL 3.1 and 3.0 are vulnerable to this issue.
CVE-2026-31719 1 Linux 1 Linux Kernel 2026-05-06 7.5 High
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: crypto: krb5enc - fix async decrypt skipping hash verification krb5enc_dispatch_decrypt() sets req->base.complete as the skcipher callback, which is the caller's own completion handler. When the skcipher completes asynchronously, this signals "done" to the caller without executing krb5enc_dispatch_decrypt_hash(), completely bypassing the integrity verification (hash check). Compare with the encrypt path which correctly uses krb5enc_encrypt_done as an intermediate callback to chain into the hash computation on async completion. Fix by adding krb5enc_decrypt_done as an intermediate callback that chains into krb5enc_dispatch_decrypt_hash() upon async skcipher completion, matching the encrypt path's callback pattern. Also fix EBUSY/EINPROGRESS handling throughout: remove krb5enc_request_complete() which incorrectly swallowed EINPROGRESS notifications that must be passed up to callers waiting on backlogged requests, and add missing EBUSY checks in krb5enc_encrypt_ahash_done for the dispatch_encrypt return value. Unset MAY_BACKLOG on the async completion path so the user won't see back-to-back EINPROGRESS notifications.
CVE-2026-41395 1 Openclaw 1 Openclaw 2026-04-29 7.5 High
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.
CVE-2026-22863 1 Deno 1 Deno 2026-04-18 7.5 High
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.
CVE-2026-29142 1 Seppmail 2 Secure Email Gateway, Seppmail Secure Email Gateway 2026-04-16 5.3 Medium
SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway before version 15.0.3 allows an attacker to forge a GINA-encrypted email.
CVE-2021-22946 9 Apple, Debian, Fedoraproject and 6 more 40 Macos, Debian Linux, Fedora and 37 more 2026-04-16 7.5 High
A user can tell curl >= 7.20.0 and <= 7.78.0 to require a successful upgrade to TLS when speaking to an IMAP, POP3 or FTP server (`--ssl-reqd` on the command line or`CURLOPT_USE_SSL` set to `CURLUSESSL_CONTROL` or `CURLUSESSL_ALL` withlibcurl). This requirement could be bypassed if the server would return a properly crafted but perfectly legitimate response.This flaw would then make curl silently continue its operations **withoutTLS** contrary to the instructions and expectations, exposing possibly sensitive data in clear text over the network.
CVE-2025-5323 2026-04-15 3.7 Low
A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in fossasia open-event-server 1.19.1. This issue affects the function send_email_change_user_email of the file /fossasia/open-event-server/blob/development/app/api/helpers/mail.py of the component Mail Verification Handler. The manipulation leads to reliance on obfuscation or encryption of security-relevant inputs without integrity checking. The attack may be initiated remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
CVE-2015-20112 2026-04-15 3.4 Low
RLPx 5 has two CTR streams based on the same key, IV, and nonce. This can facilitate decryption on a private network.
CVE-2025-58359 1 Zcash 1 Frost 2026-04-15 N/A
ZF FROST is a Rust implementation of FROST (Flexible Round-Optimised Schnorr Threshold signatures). In versions 2.0.0 through 2.1.0, refresh shares with smaller min_signers will reduce security of group. The inability to change min_signers (i.e. the threshold) with the refresh share functionality (frost_core::keys::refresh module) was not made clear to users. Using a smaller value would not decrease the threshold, and attempts to sign using a smaller threshold would fail. Additionally, after refreshing the shares with a smaller threshold, it would still be possible to sign with the original threshold, potentially causing a security loss to the participant's shares. This issue is fixed in version 2.2.0.