CVE Watch402,574 en archivo total

Vulnerabilidades explotables hoy

15,540en la vista actual

Score único combinando CVSS, membresía KEV y EPSS. Cada CVE con su ficha propia — timeline desde publicación hasta explotación activa.

En catálogo KEV1,756

Nuevos KEV · 24H0

Exploit Today ≥ 701,689

Distribución · última ventana

Crítico
4,727
Alto
18,786
Medio
17,139
Bajo
1,727

Filtros

Ventana

Severidad

Filtros

Vulnerabilidades14,641–14,680 · 15,540

CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExplotTítuloVis.

CVE-2026-1025568.6 ALT

19.6%

——6A flaw was found in libsoup. When handling an incoming WebSocket Pong frame, SoupWebsocketConnection emitted the ::pong signal with a GByteArray pointer even though the signal is declared to pass a GBytes. Applications connecting a handler that follows the documented GBytes API can trigger heap corruption or a crash upon receiving a crafted Pong.7d CVE-2026-10242510.0 CRÍ

47.7%

——14Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - Unauthenticated RCE via field shortcode injection in Balbooa Forms < 2.4.3.4 - Balbooa Forms supports administrator-defined PHP code which runs after a public form submission. The feature also supports form-field shortcodes inside that PHP. Before calling `eval()`, the component replaces each shortcode with the raw value submitted by the visitor, leading to an RCE vector. A public form must use the product's optional PHP-after-submission action and interpolate an attacker-controlled field shortcode inside a double-quoted PHP string to be vulnerable.19d CVE-2026-1024247.5 ALT

31.0%

——9Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - Unauthenticated path traversal exfiltrates local files through auto-reply attachments in Balbooa Forms < 2.4.3.4 - Balbooa Forms accepts upload-field state as Guest-controlled JSON during public form submission. For every object whose `id` merely looks numeric, the component trusts the supplied `filename`, concatenates it below the configured upload directory, and adds the result to an array of local attachment paths. It does not load the referenced attachment row, verify ownership/session/form/field, require that the ID exists, canonicalize the path, or enforce containment. If the form's normal “auto reply” and “attach uploaded files” options are enabled, the component sends those local paths as email attachments to the address submitted in an email field. A Guest can therefore submit a nonexistent numeric ID plus a traversal filename such as `../../../../configuration.php` and receive any file readable by the Joomla process.19d CVE-2026-1011279.4 CRÍ

25.9%

——8Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - Unauthenticated upload filename stored XSS in Balbooa Forms < 2.4.3.4 - The public form upload endpoint validates the uploaded file's extension and detected MIME type, but stores the attacker-supplied original multipart filename verbatim in `#__baforms_submissions_attachments.name`. A later anonymous form submission associates that temporary attachment with the newly created submission. When an administrator opens the submission, the component's JavaScript retrieves the stored attachment record and concatenates `file.name` directly into an HTML string. The complete string is assigned to `innerHTML`.19d CVE-2026-1011266.5 MED

15.6%

——5Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - File meta data tampering in Balbooa Forms < 2.4.3.4 - The final form submission processes JSON arrays per upload field, checking only that IDs are numeric. Client-supplied filenames and display names are trusted directly, introducing potential cross-session claiming, metadata tampering, and path traversal risks (e.g., via getFilePath())19d CVE-2026-1011125.3 MED

11.6%

——3Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - Unauthorized Deletion of Attachments in Balbooa Forms < 2.4.3.4 - The public removeTmpAttachment action accepts an integer attachment ID and deletes the matching database row and file. The controller verifies a Joomla session token, but the model does not bind that ID to the session that uploaded the file, the current user, the form, the upload field, or the temporary state. Any guest can obtain a token for their own session, so the token prevents CSRF but does not authorize the target object.19d CVE-2026-100245—

4.5%

——1Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (XSS or 'Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - Wikibase Extension allows Stored XSS. This issue affects Mediawiki - Wikibase Extension: from * before 1.46.1, 1.45.5, 1.43.10.26d CVE-2026-100244—

16.9%

——5Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - CentralAuth Extension allows Excavation. This issue affects Mediawiki - CentralAuth Extension: from * before 1.46.1, 1.45.5, 1.43.10.26d CVE-2026-100243—

4.5%

——1Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (XSS or 'Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - WikiSEO Extension allows Stored XSS. This issue affects Mediawiki - WikiSEO Extension: from * before 1.46.1, 1.45.5, 1.43.10.26d CVE-2026-1002427.5 ALT

35.1%

——11Dependency on Vulnerable Third-Party Component and Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - DataTransfer Extension allows Excessive Allocation. This issue affects Mediawiki - DataTransfer Extension: from 1.46.0 before 1.47.0.24d CVE-2026-100241—

24.1%

——7Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - EventBus Extension allows Excavation. This issue affects Mediawiki - EventBus Extension: 1.47.0-alpha.26d CVE-2026-1002409.1 CRÍ

22.3%

——7Missing Authorization vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - TemplateSandbox Extension allows Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs. This issue affects Mediawiki - TemplateSandbox Extension: from * before 1.46.1, 1.45.5, 1.43.10.24d CVE-2026-100238—

8.4%

——3Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (XSS or 'Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - Flow Extension allows Stored XSS. This issue affects Mediawiki - Flow Extension: from * before 1.46.1, 1.45.5, 1.43.10.26d CVE-2022-510198.8 ALT

78.3%

——24Akaunting before 2.1.31 contains an OS command injection vulnerability in the module installation and update flow where the alias parameter is passed unvalidated to shell command execution. Authenticated users with admin panel access can inject shell metacharacters into the alias parameter to execute arbitrary commands on the server.26d CVE-2026-97711—

24.5%

——7Serialize JavaScript serializes JavaScript values to a superset of JSON that includes regular expressions and functions. From 7.1.1 until 7.1.2, function values serialized by serialize-javascript are not fully protected against script-closing tags in attacker-influenced function source because SCRIPT_CLOSE_REGEXP can consume a second closing tag inside one match. When the serialized function is embedded in a script element, the surviving closing tag terminates the element early and causes the remaining output to be parsed as HTML, enabling cross-site scripting in the page origin. Only function values are affected; ordinary data values and options.isJSON output are unaffected. This issue is fixed in version 7.1.2.26d CVE-2026-976897.5 ALT

26.6%

——8urllib3 is an HTTP client library for Python. From 1.10.3 until 2.8.0, the HTTPResponse.read_chunked and HTTPResponse.stream methods can allocate unbounded memory because the streaming chunk parser buffers the chunk-size field until newline or EOF without a length bound. The trigger is that a malicious server returns Transfer-Encoding: chunked followed by a very long run of bytes without a newline. The attack mechanism is that a malicious HTTP server sends a very long unterminated chunk-size line. The impact is that unbounded memory allocation can exhaust the client process. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.0.12d CVE-2026-976885.3 MED

21.5%

——6urllib3 is an HTTP client library for Python. From 2.6.2 until 2.8.0, HTTPResponse.stream and HTTPResponse.read_chunked can enter an infinite loop because the Deflate decoder retains trailing bytes as unconsumed input after reaching end-of-stream and repeatedly decodes them without progress. The issue occurs when an untrusted server sends a chunked Deflate response whose decoded body exceeds a positive finite chunk size and whose encoded body has trailing bytes, specifically a response with Transfer-Encoding: chunked and Content-Encoding: deflate, content decoding enabled, and the positive finite amt=N streaming chunk size. The attack mechanism is that a malicious server returns a compressed chunked response with trailing bytes after the Deflate stream. The impact is excessive CPU usage and a request that does not complete, and network read timeouts do not interrupt the loop because no further socket read occurs. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.0.12d CVE-2026-976878.1 ALT

10.5%

——3urllib3 is an HTTP client library for Python. From 1.26.0 until 2.8.0, the proxy_ssl_context, proxy_assert_hostname, proxy_assert_fingerprint, ssl_context, cert_reqs, verify_mode, use_forwarding_for_https=True, and CERT_NONE configuration paths fail to remain separated because target-server TLS settings are incorrectly applied to the HTTPS proxy connection. The trigger is that an application uses an HTTPS proxy and configures target-server TLS settings that must remain separate from the proxy TLS handshake, including HTTPS forwarding with target-specific identity or credentials. Applying cert_reqs=CERT_NONE can overwrite proxy_ssl_context.verify_mode in place, and the mutation persists so later connections reusing the same context may connect to the HTTPS proxy without certificate verification. The attack mechanism is that an attacker intercepts and impersonates the HTTPS proxy after the effective proxy policy accepts the attacker's certificate. The impact is that the attacker can observe or modify forwarded traffic or receive a target TLS client certificate, while CONNECT tunneling still preserves the separate end-to-end target TLS connection. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.0.12d CVE-2026-93332—

6.0%

——2Improper access control in the partial connection API in Devolutions Server 2026.3.5.0 and earlier allows an authenticated low-privileged user to read, create, modify, and delete System Vault entries via a crafted API request.26d CVE-2026-933304.3 MED

8.7%

——3Improper rule enforcement in the PAM Active Directory provider in Devolutions Server 2026.3.5 allows a user with PAM edit permissions to bypass the Devolutions Gateway host ruleset.26d CVE-2026-923717.0 ALT

1.5%

——0TeamViewer Full Client and Host for Linux prior version 15.82 contains an improper path validation vulnerability in the Cloud Session Recording (CSR) functionality. By exploiting a race condition during path validation and subsequent file access, a local authenticated attacker may cause privileged file operations in unintended locations on the affected system.26d CVE-2026-923708.8 ALT

36.1%

——11An improper access control vulnerability in TeamViewer Full Client, Host, and related affected modules on Windows, Linux, and macOS allows an authenticated remote attacker to bypass user-configured permission settings during session establishment. By modifying access control parameters for restricted features, an attacker can perform actions that were explicitly denied by the victim's configuration. This may result in unauthorized actions and potentially lead to remote code execution on the target system.26d CVE-2026-923697.3 ALT

0.6%

——0TeamViewer Full Client and Host prior to version 15.82 on Windows contain a TOCTOU race condition in the installer rollback mechanism. A local low-privileged attacker can replace rollback backup files stored in a user-writable temporary directory before they are restored by an elevated installer, resulting in privilege escalation to NT AUHORITY/SYSTEM. Exploitation requires successful timing of the race condition and a rollback during installation or update.26d CVE-2026-923687.8 ALT

4.4%

——1TeamViewer Full Client and Host for Linux and macOS prior version 15.82 contain a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the processing of .tvs session recording files. A size mismatch during decompression of recorded session data can result in out-of-bounds heap writes. By convincing a user to open a specially crafted session recording through the "Play or convert recorded session…" feature, an attacker may achieve arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the current user26d CVE-2026-847847.5 ALT

48.7%

21.3%

——6Issue summary: The first concurrent use of the same X.509 certificate by several threads may cause its cached extension data to be freed while another thread is still using it. Impact summary: A remote, unauthenticated peer could crash a multi-threaded TLS client, or a multi-threaded TLS server that requests client certificates, if the first certificate chains built to the same trusted CA certificate are built by several connections at the same time. This is a use-after-free read, which is likely to crash the process, resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-416: Use After Free Description: OpenSSL caches the decoded values of a certificate's X.509v3 extensions inside the X509 object the first time they are needed. In OpenSSL 4.0 this cache is built in two phases: the extension values are computed while holding a read lock on the certificate, and the results are then installed into the certificate under a write lock. Because a read lock does not exclude other readers, several threads can compute the cache for the same certificate at the same time. Each thread that subsequently acquires the write lock installs its own results and frees the values installed by the thread before it, even though that earlier thread has already marked the cache as complete and may have returned pointers into it to its caller. A caller still using those pointers then reads freed memory. Any certificate shared between threads is exposed the first time its extensions are decoded. In TLS the certificates at risk are the trusted CA certificates supplied for chain verification, by whatever means, since these are shared by every connection and their extensions are decoded and cached the first time a chain is built to them. Certificates sent by the peer are decoded separately for each connection and are not shared, so they are not affected. In a TLS client verifying server certificates, or a TLS server that requests and verifies client certificates, the use-after-free could only occur if the first chains built to the same trusted CA are built by several connections at the same time. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as X.509 certificate handling is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. OpenSSL 4.0 is vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.0, 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are not affected by this issue. OpenSSL 4.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 4.0.3. This issue was reported on 27 August 2026 by Tim Becker (Xint.io) and independently in a public report on 31 August 2026 by aydinmercan. The fix has been developed by Bob Beck. -- cut (non-publishing metadata for internal use) -- Reported by: Tim Becker (Xint.io), aydinmercan Fixed by: Bob Beck18d CVE-2026-847828.2 ALT

57.3%

——17Issue summary: The DTLS retransmission logic does not correctly handle a handshake message write that is suspended part-way through. The retransmitted message can be read past the message buffer and the retransmission overwrites the internal state the suspended write needs to resume correctly. Impact summary: The retransmitted message can disclose a heap memory to the peer as plaintext handshake data or cause a crash and a Denial of Service when the read reaches an unmapped memory region. CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read Description: DTLS handshake messages can be written out in multiple fragments, and a write can suspend mid-message (returning WANT_WRITE) if the underlying transport temporarily cannot accept more data. While such a write is suspended, the DTLS retransmission timer may independently fire and ask the retransmission logic to resend an earlier, already-acknowledged-as-sent message from its retransmit queue. The retransmission logic reused the same internal buffer and position tracking as the message that was still being written, without resetting the position back to the start of the message being retransmitted. As a result the retransmission was read starting from wherever the suspended write had left off, producing a mislabelled message whose body was leftover bytes from the other, larger message still in flight - content that was never meant to be sent at that point, and which could run past the end of the allocated buffer. Separately, even when the retransmission is positioned correctly, allowing it to run to completion while another write is suspended overwrites the same shared bookkeeping that the suspended write depends on to resume. When the application later resumes the suspended write (via a subsequent SSL_read(), SSL_write(), SSL_accept(), or SSL_connect() call), it finds that bookkeeping in a state inconsistent with the message and aborts the process in a debugging build. The fix resets the retransmission's read position to the start of the message before resending, and skips retransmission entirely whenever a handshake write is still suspended, deferring to the next call that resumes it instead. FIPS impact: no The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-776963.7 BAJ

33.6%

——10Issue summary: SM2 signature generation uses non-constant-time arithmetic on secret values, forming a timing side-channel. Impact summary: An attacker able to measure SM2 signing times may learn information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the private key. CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy Description: SM2 signature generation computes the signature value using variable-time BIGNUM operations on the secret nonce and the private key, so the time taken to produce an SM2 signature depends on these secret values, forming a timing side-channel. Applications performing SM2 signature generation are affected on all platforms. FIPS Impact: no SM2 is not a FIPS algorithm.18d CVE-2026-771779.8 CRÍ

48.0%

——14Open GenAI Stack (aka ogx-ai) 2026-06-11, as used in the Meta AI backend for WhatsApp and other products, allows code execution because prompt injection (with Jinja2 template syntax) can be used to achieve server-side expression evaluation without sanitization.26d CVE-2026-758065.3 MED

65.5%

——20Issue summary: An established DTLS 1.2 association using an AEAD cipher suite can be terminated by a single unauthenticated datagram whose encrypted fragment is shorter than the mandatory explicit IV and authentication tag overhead. Impact summary: An attacker who can send a datagram that is routed to an existing DTLS 1.2 association can tear that association down without knowing any key material. This is a Denial of Service limited to the targeted association. There is no memory safety or confidentiality impact. CWE: CWE-1284: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input Description: In TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 every record protected by an AEAD cipher suite carries an explicit IV followed by the ciphertext and an authentication tag. When decrypting such a record the record layer passed the record length to the cipher implementation before checking that the record was long enough to contain the explicit IV and the tag. For a record shorter than that overhead the cipher implementation rejected the impossible length, and the record layer treated this as an internal failure and raised a fatal internal_error alert instead of treating the record as one that failed authentication. In TLS 1.2 the same record causes a fatal internal_error alert instead of the expected bad_record_mac alert. Since any undecryptable record already terminates a TLS connection, this is a protocol conformance issue rather than a security issue in TLS. The fix validates the record length against the explicit IV and tag length before any AEAD processing, so that TLS reports bad_record_mac and DTLS silently discards the record. FIPS impact: no The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-758055.3 MED

25.3%

——8Issue summary: A CMP client that requests certificate revocation on the basis of a PKCS#10 CSR may dereference a NULL pointer and terminate abnormally when processing a crafted revocation response. Impact summary: The NULL pointer dereference happens on a read which leads to a crash and a Denial of Service for the affected client application. CWE: CWE-476: NULL-pointer dereference Description: A CMP client revoking a certificate has to tell the server which certificate to revoke, and may do so by supplying a PKCS#10 CSR instead of the certificate itself or its issuer name and serial number. This is 'openssl cmp -cmd rr -csr <file>' on the command line, or OSSL_CMP_exec_RR_ses() with the certificate supplied via OSSL_CMP_CTX_set1_p10CSR() through the API. A CSR does not contain the issuer name and serial number of the certificate, so the client does not send them. A server may optionally name the certificate it revoked in its response, and the client then compares that name against what it sent. Having sent neither an issuer name nor a serial number, it has nothing to compare against, and a server returning a specially crafted name causes the client to read from a NULL pointer and crash. The revocation response is checked for valid message protection before the affected code is reached, so an attacker must be a malicious or compromised CMP server, or a man-in-the-middle in possession of the secret used for message protection. Clients that identify the certificate to be revoked by a certificate or by issuer and serial number rather than by a PKCS#10 CSR are not affected. FIPS impact: no No FIPS modules are affected by this issue, as the CMP protocol implementation is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-758045.3 MED

44.5%

——13Issue summary: OpenSSL QUIC stack does not enforce connection level flow control for streams. Remote peers may send more bytes as long as they fit within the stream flow control limits. Impact summary: A malicious remote peer may exploit the lack of connection flow control for streams to make the QUIC stack receive ~100MB of memory instead of 768 KiB (default flow control window size). CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling Description: The local QUIC stack advertises two flow control limits to its remote peer: stream flow control limit and connection flow control limit. The remote peer must follow both limits when transmitting stream data. Whenever the local QUIC stack receives a stream frame, it validates that the size of the received stream frame stays within flow control limits. If either limit is exceeded (stream level or connection level), then the QUIC stack must close the connection with a flow control error. The vulnerable OpenSSL QUIC stack enforces the stream-level but not the connection-level limit. To exploit the issue, three conditions must be met: - the remote peer opens several streams - each stream must stay within the stream-level flow control limit - there must be no zero-offset byte sent on any of the streams (to prevent the vulnerable QUIC stack from consuming data). By meeting the conditions above, the remote peer may make the local stack allocate 2 x MAX_STREAMS x (stream flow control limit) bytes of memory. MAX_STREAMS defaults to 100, and the limit applies to both bidirectional and unidirectional streams, making it 200 in total. The default flow control window for a stream is 512kB. The remote peer may force the vulnerable QUIC stack to allocate 100MB of heap per connection. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-728977.5 ALT

32.7%

——10Issue summary: A TLS server that calls SSL_set_SSL_CTX() to switch a connection to a different SSL_CTX part way through a handshake may access memory beyond the end of an internal array if the replacement context knows about more provider signature algorithms than the context the connection was created from. Applications which never call SSL_set_SSL_CTX() are not affected. Impact summary: A remote peer may be able to cause a small out-of-bounds read, and in some circumstances a fixed-value out-of-bounds write, on the server heap. This may lead to a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write Description: A TLS connection records how many certificate slots it has when it is created, taken from the SSL_CTX that created it: the built-in certificate types plus one slot for each provider TLS-SIGALG entry that context was aware of. That count sizes an internal array of per-slot certificate validity flags. An application may replace a connection's SSL_CTX part way through the handshake by calling SSL_set_SSL_CTX(), most commonly from a servername callback in order to serve a different virtual host. Doing so did not refresh the recorded count. A provider signature algorithm's slot index is its position in the list of whichever context resolves it, so if the replacement context is aware of more of them than the original, an algorithm offered by the peer can resolve to an index beyond the end of the array. Processing the peer's signature algorithms then reads one four byte word past the end for each such algorithm and, where the word read is zero, writes a fixed value over it. A peer offering many of them can corrupt heap metadata and abort the process. Only provider signature algorithms which occupy one of the excess slots, and which the server also has configured, have this effect. Codepoints the replacement context does not recognise are discarded without being resolved to a slot, and provider signature algorithms are usable only from TLS 1.3. The two contexts must therefore be aware of different numbers of provider signature algorithms, which requires separate library contexts, a provider loaded between the two being created, or providers which differ in what they advertise - in 4.0, for example, the default provider advertises SM2 where the FIPS provider does not. A deployment meeting the condition is also unable to negotiate the affected algorithms with legitimate clients, since the same stale count hides the corresponding certificates, so the misconfiguration is likely to be noticed. For that reason, and because the configuration is not the default, this issue has been assessed as Low severity. FIPS impact: no No FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-548753.7 BAJ

41.0%

——12Issue summary: A non-constant-time optimized implementation of scalar point multiplication is used for SM2 private key operations on ARM64 and RISC-V platforms. Impact summary: An attacker able to measure the time taken by, or to observe the cache-line access pattern of SM2 signing or decryption on an affected platform can learn information about the secret scalar. CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy Description: On ARM64 and RISC-V processors, the SM2 curve uses an optimized scalar multiplication implementation whose conditional branches and table look ups are chosen according to the bits of the secret scalar. The execution time and the cache-access pattern therefore depend on the long-term private key (during SM2 decryption) or the per-signature nonce (during SM2 signature generation), forming a timing and cache side-channel. FIPS Impact: no SM2 is not a FIPS algorithm and the optimized SM2 implementation is not part of the FIPS module. OpenSSL 4.0, 3.6, 3.5 and 3.4 are vulnerable to this issue on AArch64 and RISC-V. OpenSSL 3.0, 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are not affected by this issue. OpenSSL 4.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 4.0.3. OpenSSL 3.6 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.5. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.9. OpenSSL 3.4 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.4.8. This issue was reported on 2 May 2026 by Abhinav Agarwal. It was independently reported on 6 June 2026 by Feng Xue. The fix was developed by Igor Ustinov. -- cut (non-publishing metadata for internal use) -- Reported by: Abhinav Agarwal, Feng Xue Fixed by: Igor Ustinov18d CVE-2026-548737.5 ALT

52.7%

——16Issue summary: QUIC process may keep memory for QUIC packet buffer for much longer period than necessary. Impact summary: Remote peer can exploit this vulnerability by sending maliciously crafted packets, making the local QUIC stack to keep the memory for packet buffers allocated. The time for which the memory remains allocated is entirely under the control of the potentially malicious remote peer. CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling Description: To save copy operation from the packet buffer to the stream reassemble buffer the QUIC stack leaves the stream data on the packet buffer waiting to be copied to a buffer provided by the local receiving application. The QUIC stack releases a reference to the packet buffer only after the data are copied to the application buffer. This design is more efficient for legitimate data transfers but enables an attacker to allocate a lot more memory than actually required by the data kept in the receiving stream buffer. To mitigate the vulnerability, the QUIC stack now calculates and monitors memory overhead for every stream. The memory overhead for a single stream frame is calculated as a difference between the size of the whole packet that carries the stream frame and the size of the stream frame itself. The memory overhead for a single stream frame is added to the total (cumulative) memory overhead QUIC stack keeps for each stream. Once the cumulative memory overhead exceeds 64kB, the QUIC stack moves the stream frame data from the packet buffer to the stream buffer, starting with the next packet received. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-548723.7 BAJ

36.7%

——11Issue summary: The generic elliptic-curve scalar multiplication used for ECDSA and SM2 signature operations with curves that do not have a dedicated implementation leaks information about the secret nonce through timing. Impact summary: An attacker able to measure signing times may learn information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the private key. CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy Description: The generic elliptic-curve scalar multiplication used for curves that do not have a dedicated constant-time implementation pads the secret scalar with non-constant-time BIGNUM operations, so the time taken depends on the value of the secret scalar derived from the ECDSA and SM2 nonce. The leak is very small; observing it requires a large number of measurements. The effect is largest for curves whose group order lies on a machine-word boundary, such as brainpoolP384r1. Applications using ECDSA signing over the Brainpool and other generic prime curves, and SM2 signing on platforms that use the generic implementation, are vulnerable to this issue. The NIST curves P-256, P-384 and P-521 use dedicated constant-time implementations and are not affected. FIPS Impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected: the approved NIST curves used in the FIPS provider have dedicated constant-time implementations and do not use the affected code path.18d CVE-2026-427725.3 MED

41.1%

——12Issue summary: The QUIC stream reassembly algorithm performance deteriorates progressively as packets are arriving out of order. The worst case has a quadratic complexity proportional to the number of stream frames kept in the buffer for the received stream data. Impact summary: A remote QUIC peer that completes the handshake can create a connection-scoped CPU pressure and potentially a Denial of Service using compliant STREAM frames inside the advertised receive window, with low attacker bandwidth. CWE: CWE-407: Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity Description: OpenSSL manages received QUIC stream fragments using a doubly-linked list. While it optimizes for append operations (at the end of the list), it falls back to a head-to-tail linear search for any fragment that does not immediately follow the current `tail`. By manipulating the sequence of offsets, an attacker can force the server to perform O(n^2) operations, consuming excessive CPU time for the QUIC process. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-351913.7 BAJ

53.7%

——16Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address validation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its unvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000 unvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data received. Impact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the OpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of a DDoS attack. CWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation Description: OpenSSL's QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client address validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not used for a traffic amplification attack. If this feature is disabled on the server, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3 times the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the TLS handshake is completed. The OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the length of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when processing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may, after establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a subsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to account the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting in the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has, thereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC. FIPS impact: no As the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.18d CVE-2026-351895.3 MED

24.4%

——7Issue summary: A certificate with many nameRelativeToCRLIssuer CRL distribution points causes disproportionate heap growth when OpenSSL caches X.509 extensions. Impact summary: Receiving a crafted certificate from a malicious peer can lead to significant memory pressure and possible Denial of Service in clients or in servers that solicit client certificates. CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling Description: A certificate or a set of certificates that fits under the limit for size of certificates accepted from the peer (~100 KiB) can result in allocation of several hundred MiB of resident memory on the receiving side during a normal TLS handshake. This may be enough to crash the client or server, if multiple concurrent connections lead to similarly large memory allocations. The fix postpones processing of the CRL distribution points extensions in certificates to the time when the processed value is required for CRL processing. This avoids keeping large memory allocations for a long time when such certificates are received. FIPS impact: no The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.18d CVE-2026-197437.8 ALT

3.8%

——1Improper path validation in the local IPC service of TeamViewer Full Client and Host on Windows, Linux, and macOS prior to version 15.82 allows a local authenticated user with low privileges to perform arbitrary file writes with elevated privileges (NT AUTHORITY/SYSTEM \ root). By sending crafted IPC commands to the local service daemon, an attacker could manipulate file paths, leading to local privilege escalation.26d