CVE-2026-75806

MEDIUMPre-NVD 5.35.3—
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

Score 5.3 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2026-09-29. CISA-ADP (Vulnrichment) CVSS v3.1 baseline 5.3; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: cisa-adp, epss, ghsa
Trending — Patch released this week
5.3EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 5.3Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Issue 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.

CVSS v3
5.3
EG Score
5.3MEDIUMhigh confidence
EG Risk
39
EG Risk 39/100CISA SSVC

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
Severity53% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA SSVC: Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
30th
KEV
Not listed

CISA SSVCTrack 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). Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it: high means the affected system is essential to your organisation's mission, or its compromise could cause irreversible harm to people. CISA's decision table

Published

September 29, 2026

Last Modified

September 29, 2026

Advisory Details (5)

Auto-updated Sep 29, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_commit.
github_commit

commit 5af82fefbaf2 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 5af82fefbaf2 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/5af82fefbaf2b5fec2fc0e1d87f112844902f01d
github_commit

commit 3a4589d015a9 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 3a4589d015a9 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/3a4589d015a9049d47b66f186cf50a8711343a1d
github_commit

commit 050b275cd671 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 050b275cd671 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/050b275cd671a6eed1d6457642d41a5a77aab972
github_commit

commit 04728a289a82 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 04728a289a82 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/04728a289a823e68137f88da016cb9ede307217d

Patch Availability(3)

Vendor / EcosystemFixed in / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntuopenssl-provider-legacy (3.5.5-1ubuntu3.6) @ resolute2026-10-03ubuntu
redhatopenssl-main-3.5.9-0.1.hum12026-09-30redhat
redhatopenssl3-main-3.5.9-0.1.hum12026-09-30redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Additional Vendor Advisories

(1)

Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 21× in last 7d / 21× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. 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. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-03 16:28 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-03 16:28 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-10-03 16:28 UTCGHSA enrichment
  4. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-10-02 17:52 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-02 17:52 UTCVendor advisory
  7. 2026-10-02 17:52 UTCGHSA enrichment
  8. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-10-01 19:15 UTCVendor advisory
  10. 2026-10-01 19:15 UTCGHSA enrichment
  11. 2026-09-30 20:36 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-09-30 20:36 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-09-30 20:36 UTCGHSA enrichment
  14. 2026-09-29 22:00 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-09-29 22:00 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-09-29 22:00 UTCGHSA enrichment
  17. 2026-09-29 17:03 UTCEG score recompute▲ 5.30
  18. 2026-09-29 17:03 UTCMITRE cvelistV5CVSS v3 → 5.3 · severity → MEDIUM
  19. 2026-09-29 16:24 UTCNVD update
  20. 2026-09-29 15:38 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-09-29 15:38 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-75806?
CVE-2026-75806 is a medium vulnerability published on September 29, 2026. Issue 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…
When was CVE-2026-75806 disclosed?
CVE-2026-75806 was first published on September 29, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-75806 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-75806 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (30th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-75806?
CVE-2026-75806 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.3 (CISA-ADP / Vulnrichment enrichment; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-75806?
A fix for CVE-2026-75806 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-75806 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-75806

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-75806?

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