@@ -28,6 +28,303 @@ OpenSSL Releases |
28 | 28 | OpenSSL 3.5 |
29 | 29 | ----------- |
30 | 30 |
|
| 31 | +### Changes between 3.5.6 and 3.5.7 [9 Jun 2026] |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | + * Fixed heap use-after-free in `PKCS7_verify()`. |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | + Severity: High |
| 36 | + |
| 37 | + Issue summary: A specially crafted PKCS#7 or S/MIME signed message could |
| 38 | + trigger a use-after-free during PKCS#7 signature verification. |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | + Impact summary: A use-after-free may result in process crashes, heap |
| 41 | + corruption, or, potentially, remote code execution. |
| 42 | + |
| 43 | + Reported by: Thai Duong (Calif.io in collaboration with Claude |
| 44 | + and Anthropic Research). |
| 45 | + |
| 46 | + ([CVE-2026-45447]) |
| 47 | + |
| 48 | + *Igor Ustinov* |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | + * Fixed CMS `AuthEnvelopedData` processing may accept forged messages. |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | + Severity: Moderate |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | + Issue Summary: Cryptographic Message Services (CMS) processing fails |
| 55 | + to perform sufficient input validation on the cipher and tag length fields |
| 56 | + of `AuthEnvelopedData` containers, leading to various potential compromises. |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | + Impact Summary: Attackers making use of these vulnerabilities may achieve |
| 59 | + key-equivalent functionality for a given CMS recipient and/or bypass |
| 60 | + integrity validation for a given message. |
| 61 | + |
| 62 | + Reported by: Asim Viladi Oglu Manizada, Alex Gaynor (Anthropic), |
| 63 | + Ying Dong, and Haiyang Huang. |
| 64 | + |
| 65 | + ([CVE-2026-34182]) |
| 66 | + |
| 67 | + *Neil Horman* |
| 68 | + |
| 69 | + * Fixed unbounded memory growth in the QUIC `PATH_CHALLENGE` handler. |
| 70 | + |
| 71 | + Severity: Moderate |
| 72 | + |
| 73 | + Issue summary: Remote peer may exhaust heap memory of the QUIC server |
| 74 | + or client by flooding it with packets containing `PATH_CHALLENGE` frames. |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | + Impact summary: A malicious remote peer can cause an unbounded memory |
| 77 | + allocation which can lead to an abnormal termination of the application |
| 78 | + acting as a QUIC client or server and a Denial of Service. |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | + Reported by: Abhinav Agarwal. |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | + ([CVE-2026-34183]) |
| 83 | + |
| 84 | + *Abhinav Agarwal and Alexandr Nedvedicky* |
| 85 | + |
| 86 | + * Fixed NULL pointer dereference in QUIC server initial packet handling. |
| 87 | + |
| 88 | + Severity: Moderate |
| 89 | + |
| 90 | + Issue summary: Receiving a QUIC initial packet with an invalid token |
| 91 | + may trigger a NULL pointer dereference in the OpenSSL QUIC server |
| 92 | + with address validation disabled. |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | + Impact summary: NULL pointer dereference typically causes abnormal |
| 95 | + termination of the affected QUIC server process and a Denial of Service. |
| 96 | + |
| 97 | + Reported by: Sunwoo Lee (KENTECH), Hyuk Lim (KENTECH), |
| 98 | + and Seunghyun Yoon (KENTECH). |
| 99 | + |
| 100 | + ([CVE-2026-42764]) |
| 101 | + |
| 102 | + *Sunwoo Lee (KENTECH), Hyuk Lim (KENTECH), and Seunghyun Yoon (KENTECH)* |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | + * Fixed AES-OCB IV ignored on `EVP_Cipher()` path. |
| 105 | + |
| 106 | + Severity: Moderate |
| 107 | + |
| 108 | + Issue summary: When an application drives an AES-OCB context through |
| 109 | + the public `EVP_Cipher()` one-shot interface, the application-supplied |
| 110 | + initialisation vector (IV) is silently discarded. |
| 111 | + |
| 112 | + Impact summary: Every message encrypted under the same key uses the same |
| 113 | + effective nonce regardless of the IV supplied by the caller, resulting |
| 114 | + in `(key, nonce)` reuse and loss of confidentiality. If the same code path |
| 115 | + is used to compute the authentication tag, the tag depends only |
| 116 | + on the `(key, IV)` pair and not on the plaintext or ciphertext, allowing |
| 117 | + universal forgery of arbitrary ciphertext from a single captured message. |
| 118 | + |
| 119 | + Reported by: Alex Gaynor (Anthropic). |
| 120 | + |
| 121 | + ([CVE-2026-45445]) |
| 122 | + |
| 123 | + *Viktor Dukhovni* |
| 124 | + |
| 125 | + * Fixed possible heap buffer overflow in ASN.1 multibyte string conversion. |
| 126 | + |
| 127 | + Severity: Low |
| 128 | + |
| 129 | + Issue summary: A signed integer overflow when sizing the destination |
| 130 | + buffer for Unicode output in `ASN1_mbstring_ncopy()` can lead to a heap |
| 131 | + buffer overflow. |
| 132 | + |
| 133 | + Impact summary: A heap buffer overflow may lead to a crash or possibly |
| 134 | + attacker controlled code execution or other undefined behaviour. |
| 135 | + |
| 136 | + Reported by: Zehua Qiao and Jinwen He. |
| 137 | + |
| 138 | + ([CVE-2026-7383]) |
| 139 | + |
| 140 | + *Viktor Dukhovni* |
| 141 | + |
| 142 | + * Fixed out-of-bounds read in CMS password-based decryption. |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | + Severity: Low |
| 145 | + |
| 146 | + Issue summary: When CMS password-based decryption ([RFC 3211]/PWRI key |
| 147 | + unwrap) processes attacker-supplied CMS data, an attacker-chosen stream-mode |
| 148 | + KEK cipher can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read in `kek_unwrap_key()`. |
| 149 | + |
| 150 | + Impact summary: A heap buffer over-read may trigger a crash, which leads |
| 151 | + to Denial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory |
| 152 | + page boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information |
| 153 | + disclosure, as the over-read bytes are not revealed to the attacker. |
| 154 | + |
| 155 | + Reported by: Bhabani Sankar Das and Haruki Oyama (Waseda University). |
| 156 | + |
| 157 | + ([CVE-2026-9076]) |
| 158 | + |
| 159 | + *Nikola Pajkovský* |
| 160 | + |
| 161 | + * Fixed heap buffer over-read in ASN.1 content parsing. |
| 162 | + |
| 163 | + Severity: Low |
| 164 | + |
| 165 | + Issue summary: Parsing a crafted DER-encoded ASN.1 structure with a primitive |
| 166 | + element whose content exceeds 2 gigabytes in length may cause a heap buffer |
| 167 | + over-read on 64-bit Unix and Unix-like platforms. |
| 168 | + |
| 169 | + Impact summary: The heap buffer over-read may crash the application (Denial |
| 170 | + of Service) or to load into the decoded ASN.1 object contents of memory |
| 171 | + beyond the end of the input buffer. More typically, such ASN.1 elements |
| 172 | + would instead be truncated. |
| 173 | + |
| 174 | + Reported by: Frank Buss. |
| 175 | + |
| 176 | + ([CVE-2026-34180]) |
| 177 | + |
| 178 | + *Viktor Dukhovni* |
| 179 | + |
| 180 | + * Fixed PKCS#12 files with PBMAC1 are accepted with short HMAC keys. |
| 181 | + |
| 182 | + Severity: Low |
| 183 | + |
| 184 | + Issue Summary: The PKCS#12 file processing fails to perform sufficient input |
| 185 | + validation for files that use Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 |
| 186 | + (PBMAC1) integrity mechanism allowing a certificate and private key forgery. |
| 187 | + |
| 188 | + Impact Summary: An attacker impersonating a user can cause a service reading |
| 189 | + PKCS#12 files to accept forged certificates and private keys with a 1 in 256 |
| 190 | + probability. |
| 191 | + |
| 192 | + Reported by: Pavol Žáčik (Red Hat) and Alex Gaynor (Anthropic). |
| 193 | + |
| 194 | + ([CVE-2026-34181]) |
| 195 | + |
| 196 | + *Alicja Kario (Red Hat)* |
| 197 | + |
| 198 | + * Fixed possible NULL dereference in password-dased CMS decryption. |
| 199 | + |
| 200 | + Severity: Low |
| 201 | + |
| 202 | + Issue summary: A specially crafted password-encrypted CMS message |
| 203 | + could trigger a NULL pointer dereference during CMS decryption. |
| 204 | + |
| 205 | + Impact summary: This NULL pointer dereference could lead to an application |
| 206 | + crash and a Denial of Service. |
| 207 | + |
| 208 | + Reported by: Mayank Jangid, Kushal Khemka, Hari Priandana, |
| 209 | + Bhabani Sankar Das, and Qifan Zhang (Palo Alto Networks). |
| 210 | + |
| 211 | + ([CVE-2026-42766]) |
| 212 | + |
| 213 | + *Igor Ustinov* |
| 214 | + |
| 215 | + * Fixed NULL pointer dereference in CRMF `EncryptedValue` decryption. |
| 216 | + |
| 217 | + Severity: Low |
| 218 | + |
| 219 | + Issue summary: An attacker-controlled CMP (Certificate Management Protocol) |
| 220 | + server could trigger a NULL pointer dereference in a CMP client application. |
| 221 | + |
| 222 | + Impact summary: A NULL pointer dereference could cause a crash |
| 223 | + of the application and a Denial of Service. |
| 224 | + |
| 225 | + Reported by: Zhanpeng Liu (Tencent Xuanwu Lab), |
| 226 | + Guannan Wang (Tencent Xuanwu Lab), and Guancheng Li (Tencent Xuanwu Lab). |
| 227 | + |
| 228 | + ([CVE-2026-42767]) |
| 229 | + |
| 230 | + *Igor Ustinov* |
| 231 | + |
| 232 | + * Fixed multi-`RecipientInfo` Bleichenbacher Oracle in `CMS_decrypt()` |
| 233 | + and `PKCS7_decrypt()`. |
| 234 | + |
| 235 | + Severity: Low |
| 236 | + |
| 237 | + Issue summary: The `CMS_decrypt()` and `PKCS7_decrypt()` functions |
| 238 | + are vulnerable to Bleichenbacher-style attack when an attacker is able |
| 239 | + to provide CMS or S/MIME messages and observe the error code |
| 240 | + and/or decryption output. |
| 241 | + |
| 242 | + Impact summary: The Bleichenbacher-style attack allows an attacker to use |
| 243 | + the victim's vulnerable application as a way to decrypt or sign messages |
| 244 | + with the victim's private RSA key. |
| 245 | + |
| 246 | + Reported by: Alex Gaynor (Anthropic). |
| 247 | + |
| 248 | + ([CVE-2026-42768]) |
| 249 | + |
| 250 | + *Dmitry Belyavskiy (Red Hat) and Alicja Kario (Red Hat)* |
| 251 | + |
| 252 | + * Fixed trust anchor substitution via `cert`/`issuer` typo in CMP |
| 253 | + `rootCaKeyUpdate`. |
| 254 | + |
| 255 | + Severity: Low |
| 256 | + |
| 257 | + Issue Summary: An error in the callback used to verify the certificate |
| 258 | + provided in a Root CA key update Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) |
| 259 | + message response rendered the certificate validation ineffectual, |
| 260 | + which could lead to escalation of credentials from the Registration |
| 261 | + Authority (RA) level to the root Certification Authority (root CA) level. |
| 262 | + |
| 263 | + Impact Summary: The Registration Authority could replace the root CA |
| 264 | + certificate for the CMP clients with an arbitrary root CA certificate. |
| 265 | + |
| 266 | + Reported by: Alex Gaynor (Anthropic). |
| 267 | + |
| 268 | + ([CVE-2026-42769]) |
| 269 | + |
| 270 | + *Alex Gaynor (Anthropic) and Bob Beck* |
| 271 | + |
| 272 | + * Fixed FFC-DH peer validation uses attacker-supplied `q`. |
| 273 | + |
| 274 | + Severity: Low |
| 275 | + |
| 276 | + Issue summary: When `EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer()` is called with a DHX (X9.42) |
| 277 | + peer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership. |
| 278 | + |
| 279 | + Impact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying |
| 280 | + the victim's `p` and `g` parameters, a forged `q = r` (a small prime factor |
| 281 | + of the cofactor `(p − 1)/q_local`), and a public value `Y` of order `r` can |
| 282 | + recover the victim's private key after a small number of key exchange |
| 283 | + attempts. |
| 284 | + |
| 285 | + Reported by: Alex Gaynor (Anthropic). |
| 286 | + |
| 287 | + ([CVE-2026-42770]) |
| 288 | + |
| 289 | + *Alex Gaynor (Anthropic), Viktor Dukhovni, and Norbert Pócs* |
| 290 | + |
| 291 | + * Fixed incorrect tag processing for empty messages in AES-GCM-SIV |
| 292 | + and AES-SIV modes. |
| 293 | + |
| 294 | + Severity: Low |
| 295 | + |
| 296 | + Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV ([RFC 5297]) and AES-GCM-SIV |
| 297 | + ([RFC 8452]) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated |
| 298 | + Data) with an empty ciphertext, allowing forgery of such messages. |
| 299 | + |
| 300 | + Impact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD |
| 301 | + to the victim's application using these ciphers. |
| 302 | + |
| 303 | + Reported by: Alex Gaynor (Anthropic). |
| 304 | + |
| 305 | + ([CVE-2026-45446]) |
| 306 | + |
| 307 | + *Dmitry Belyavskiy (Red Hat)* |
| 308 | + |
| 309 | + * Fixed TLS 1.3 server not sending `NewSessionTicket` message |
| 310 | + after ciphersuite mismatch. |
| 311 | + <!-- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/30626 --> |
| 312 | + |
| 313 | + *Daniel Kubec* |
| 314 | + |
| 315 | + * Implemented validation of the minimal length of PSK identity |
| 316 | + being of at least one byte long, as required per [RFC 8446]. |
| 317 | + <!-- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/31058 --> |
| 318 | + |
| 319 | + *Matt Caswell* |
| 320 | + |
| 321 | + * Fixed usage of stale application buffer pointer by kTLS implementation |
| 322 | + after incomplete writes when `SSL_MODE_ACCEPT_MOVING_WRITE_BUFFER` is set, |
| 323 | + that led to invalid memory reads and sending of incorrect data. |
| 324 | + <!-- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/31146 --> |
| 325 | + |
| 326 | + *Ilya Maximets* |
| 327 | + |
31 | 328 | ### Changes between 3.5.5 and 3.5.6 [7 Apr 2026] |
32 | 329 |
|
33 | 330 | * Fixed incorrect failure handling in RSA KEM RSASVE encapsulation. |
@@ -21961,6 +22258,8 @@ ndif |
21961 | 22258 | [CVE-2025-69420]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2025-69420 |
21962 | 22259 | [CVE-2025-69421]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2025-69421 |
21963 | 22260 | [CVE-2026-2673]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-2673 |
| 22261 | +[CVE-2026-7383]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-7383 |
| 22262 | +[CVE-2026-9076]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-9076 |
21964 | 22263 | [CVE-2026-22795]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-22795 |
21965 | 22264 | [CVE-2026-22796]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-22796 |
21966 | 22265 | [CVE-2026-28387]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-28387 |
@@ -21969,5 +22268,22 @@ ndif |
21969 | 22268 | [CVE-2026-28390]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-28390 |
21970 | 22269 | [CVE-2026-31789]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-31789 |
21971 | 22270 | [CVE-2026-31790]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-31790 |
| 22271 | +[CVE-2026-34180]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-34180 |
| 22272 | +[CVE-2026-34181]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-34181 |
| 22273 | +[CVE-2026-34182]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-34182 |
| 22274 | +[CVE-2026-34183]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-34183 |
| 22275 | +[CVE-2026-42764]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-42764 |
| 22276 | +[CVE-2026-42766]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-42766 |
| 22277 | +[CVE-2026-42767]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-42767 |
| 22278 | +[CVE-2026-42768]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-42768 |
| 22279 | +[CVE-2026-42769]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-42769 |
| 22280 | +[CVE-2026-42770]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-42770 |
| 22281 | +[CVE-2026-45445]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-45445 |
| 22282 | +[CVE-2026-45446]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-45446 |
| 22283 | +[CVE-2026-45447]: https://openssl-library.org/news/vulnerabilities/#CVE-2026-45447 |
21972 | 22284 | [ESV]: https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/cryptographic-module-validation-program/entropy-validations |
21973 | 22285 | [RFC 2578 (STD 58), section 3.5]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2578#section-3.5 |
| 22286 | +[RFC 3211]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3211 |
| 22287 | +[RFC 5297]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5297 |
| 22288 | +[RFC 8446]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8446 |
| 22289 | +[RFC 8452]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8452 |