Issue summary: OpenSSL CMS decryption sizes the key-unwrap output buffer based
on querying the unwrapped key size, but the AES-WRAP-PAD unwrap primitive
can write and cleanse more bytes than that query reports, causing an 8-byte
out-of-bounds heap write.
Impact summary: An attacker who supplies a crafted CMS message can trigger a
deterministic 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write when the victim decrypts it
with CMS_decrypt(), corrupting the heap and typically resulting in a Denial
of Service.
CWE: CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write
Description: The key-wrap OID is potentially attacker-controlled on the wire.
CMS unwrapping allows both id-aesNNN-wrap-pad and id-aesNNN-wrap ciphers.
An attacker can take a legitimate message and change a single OID byte to
select the padded variant while leaving the message otherwise valid. Since
the unwrap key is derived from the recipient's private operation (ECDH key
agreement or ML-KEM decapsulation), the RFC 5649 integrity check cannot
pass, and the decryption fails with integrity failure.
The write is a fixed-size (8-byte), fixed-value (zero) heap overflow
immediately past the allocation, requires no special configuration, and is
reachable from the public CMS_decrypt() function. The consequence is
a heap corruption leading to a Denial of Service. The fix in the CMS code
sizes the unwrap output buffer for the worst case so a failed unwrap cannot
write past the allocation.
FIPS impact: no
As the CMS code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS
modules are affected by this CVE.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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