We collect and classify mentions across channels that move before tickets do: advisories, researcher posts, exploit references, and technical discussion.
[ 02 ]
Score attention
CVEs surface by signal volume and trajectory, not a static severity label, so spikes in discussion map to spikes in urgency.
[ 03 ]
Surface threat context
Exploit momentum, PoC noise, active exploitation flags, and patch availability appear alongside each CVE so triage is factual, not guesswork.
[ 04 ]
Scope to your stack
Filter by vendor and product (Microsoft, Apple, Cisco, and more) so the feed reflects exposure you actually run, not the entire internet’s backlog.
> loop: raw social post → classify → enrich with threat context → emit to your scoped feed
About VulnSocial
VulnSocial is not a generic scanner. We aggregate and classify vulnerability signals from the channels that move first: researchers, advisories, exploit references, and community discussion. CVEs are ordered by attention and momentum, not CVSS alone. Active exploitation indicators, PoC noise, and patch availability sit next to each CVE so triage is grounded in what is happening now.
Scope the dashboard with vendor and product filters to match your stack. Security teams use VulnSocial to cut through alert fatigue: SOC analysts for ranked triage, leads for credible briefings, DevSecOps for stack-specific trending and remediation timing. Share snapshots with your team from the feed when you need to align on what matters today.
VULNSOCIAL
openssl/opensslFix what matters first
Ranked by live signal for this scope. Use the feed below to prioritize fixes.
We collect and classify mentions across channels that move before tickets do: advisories, researcher posts, exploit references, and technical discussion.
[ 02 ]
Score attention
CVEs surface by signal volume and trajectory, not a static severity label, so spikes in discussion map to spikes in urgency.
[ 03 ]
Surface threat context
Exploit momentum, PoC noise, active exploitation flags, and patch availability appear alongside each CVE so triage is factual, not guesswork.
[ 04 ]
Scope to your stack
Filter by vendor and product (Microsoft, Apple, Cisco, and more) so the feed reflects exposure you actually run, not the entire internet’s backlog.
> loop: raw social post → classify → enrich with threat context → emit to your scoped feed
About VulnSocial
VulnSocial is not a generic scanner. We aggregate and classify vulnerability signals from the channels that move first: researchers, advisories, exploit references, and community discussion. CVEs are ordered by attention and momentum, not CVSS alone. Active exploitation indicators, PoC noise, and patch availability sit next to each CVE so triage is grounded in what is happening now.
Scope the dashboard with vendor and product filters to match your stack. Security teams use VulnSocial to cut through alert fatigue: SOC analysts for ranked triage, leads for credible briefings, DevSecOps for stack-specific trending and remediation timing. Share snapshots with your team from the feed when you need to align on what matters today.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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 Beck
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
Issue 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 Beck
Issue 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.
Issue 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.
