CVE-2026-53762

MEDIUMPre-NVD 6.26.2
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This medium-severity CVE scores 6.2 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: <0.1% (below the 1st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source
Elevated
6.2EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • CISA's Vulnrichment rates exploitation as PoC; EchelonGraph holds no exploit-code reference for it
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: <0.1%CVSS: 6.2Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

VeraCrypt provides disk encryption with strong security based on TrueCrypt. Prior to 1.26.29, non-default builds created with WOLFCRYPT=1 and WOLFCRYPT_BACKEND route SHA-256 and SHA-512 volume-header key derivation through derive_key_sha256 and derive_key_sha512 in src/Crypto/wolfCrypt.c, where the configured iterations value is discarded and wc_HKDF is used instead of PBKDF2-HMAC. Changing the PIM or iteration count therefore does not increase derivation cost, allowing an attacker with an affected container, disk image, or volume header to perform substantially cheaper offline password guesses. Official precompiled VeraCrypt binaries and normal distribution packages use the standard PBKDF2 backend and are not affected. Volumes created by an affected WOLFCRYPT=1 build require backup and recreation because corrected builds derive different keys. This issue is fixed in version 1.26.29.

CVSS v3
6.2
EG Score
6.2MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
44
EG Risk 44/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity62% × 45%
The EG Score, 6.2 of 10.
Exploitation40% × 40%
EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
<0.1%
EPSS %ILE
below the 1st
KEV
Not listed

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

August 21, 2026

Last Modified

September 18, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Aug 21, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github, github_commit, github_release.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

wolfCrypt backend bypasses VeraCrypt PBKDF2 iteration count (non-default WOLFCRYPT=1 builds) · Advisory · veracrypt/VeraCrypt · GitHub

https://github.com/veracrypt/VeraCrypt/security/advisories/GHSA-94c6-mgmv-mqc5
GitHub release Patch Available

VeraCrypt 1.26.29

Patch available: veracrypt/VeraCrypt VeraCrypt_1.26.29

https://github.com/veracrypt/VeraCrypt/releases/tag/VeraCrypt_1.26.29
GitHub commit

commit 39f93910075e (veracrypt/VeraCrypt)

Fix landed in veracrypt/VeraCrypt commit 39f93910075e — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/veracrypt/VeraCrypt/commit/39f93910075e1cf492fcf4a9f99a53c7d0b96b87

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 32× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  2. 2026-10-12 15:57 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-11 19:40 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-11 16:55 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-11 14:18 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  7. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  8. 2026-10-09 05:47 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  10. 2026-10-07 01:14 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  12. 2026-10-05 01:31 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  14. 2026-10-04 02:30 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  16. 2026-10-03 01:35 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  18. 2026-09-30 07:51 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-09-29 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  20. 2026-09-28 22:25 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-09-28 00:21 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  23. 2026-09-25 05:50 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-09-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  25. 2026-09-24 07:56 UTCEG score recompute
Show 20 more
  1. 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  2. 2026-09-23 10:02 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-09-19 18:24 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-09-18 20:17 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  6. 2026-09-17 07:57 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  8. 2026-09-11 20:30 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-09-04 22:20 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-09-04 05:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  11. 2026-08-29 12:35 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-08-28 21:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  13. 2026-08-26 18:24 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-08-26 18:07 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-08-25 10:59 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-08-23 15:11 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-08-23 00:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  18. 2026-08-21 19:21 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-08-21 19:04 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 6.2 MEDIUM
  20. 2026-08-21 19:04 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-53762?
CVE-2026-53762 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on August 21, 2026. VeraCrypt provides disk encryption with strong security based on TrueCrypt. Prior to 1.26.29, non-default builds created with WOLFCRYPT=1 and WOLFCRYPTBACKEND route SHA-256 and SHA-512 volume-header key derivation through derivekeysha256 and derivekeysha512 in src/Crypto/wolfCrypt.c, where the…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-53762 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-53762 was published on August 21, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of September 18, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-53762 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-53762 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a <0.1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (below the 1st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-53762?
CVE-2026-53762 has a CVSS base score of 6.2 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-53762?
A fix for CVE-2026-53762 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-53762

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-53762?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs