CVE WatchAug 26, 2026

CVE-2026-76784

Multiple TP-Link Kasa smart home devices contain insufficient cryptographic protections in the local device communication protocol. An adjac

CVSS

—

No CVSS

EPSS

—

KEV

—

Exploit Today

—

0-100

Published: Aug 26, 2026 · Last modified: Aug 26, 2026 · CWE-325

EPSS · 30d

Not enough EPSS history yet.

Technical description

Multiple TP-Link Kasa smart home devices contain insufficient cryptographic protections in the local device communication protocol. An adjacent network attacker may intercept, replay or forge locally exchanged control messages, potentially resulting in unauthorized device control. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to manipulate the operational state of an affected device, resulting in unauthorized state changes, disruption of normal device functionality or a denial-of-service condition.

Official references

Related CVEs

CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExploitTitleMod.

CVE-2026-252506.0 MED

—

———EAZ EazyFix 12.9 allows a Security Feature Bypass related to a "Missing Cryptographic Step" associated with "Secure Boot disable."5h CVE-2026-176669.1 CRI

15.1%

——5Cryptographic Flaw in Enterprise in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed an attacker in a privileged network position to bypass discretionary access control via malicious network traffic. (Chromium security severity: High)25d CVE-2026-597766.8 MED

3.8%

——1Missing Cryptographic Step (CWE-325) vulnerability exists in certain FeliCa IC chips shipped in or before 2017. If the vulnerability is exploited, information stored in the IC chip may be read or tampered with.37d CVE-2026-586386.0 MED

14.2%

——4Missing cryptographic step in Windows Boot Loader allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally.36d CVE-2026-551447.1 HIG

13.1%

——4Missing cryptographic step in Windows CryptoAPI allows an authorized attacker to perform tampering locally.38d CVE-2026-454464.8 MED

30.2%

——9Issue 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.36d