CVE-2009-3555

CRITICALNVD 9.89.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 9.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2022-05-02. NVD baseline CVSS 9.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 5 sources updated this weekWeaponized

Also known asEUVD-2022-3720 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-f7w7-6pjc-wwm6 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • 41 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running an affected version — derived from Shodan data (© Shodan); a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open
  • High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 87%
  • Public exploit code is available (Exploit-DB, marked verified by Exploit-DB, other public proof-of-concept code)
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 87%CVSS: 9.8Exploit: Exploit-DB (verified) · other public PoCExposed services: 41

A fix is available — apply it.

The TLS protocol, and the SSL protocol 3.0 and possibly earlier, as used in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.0, mod_ssl in the Apache HTTP Server 2.2.14 and earlier, OpenSSL before 0.9.8l, GnuTLS 2.8.5 and earlier, Mozilla Network Security Services (NSS) 3.12.4 and earlier, multiple Cisco products, and other products, does not properly associate renegotiation handshakes with an existing connection, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to insert data into HTTPS sessions, and possibly other types of sessions protected by TLS or SSL, by sending an unauthenticated request that is processed retroactively by a server in a post-renegotiation context, related to a "plaintext injection" attack, aka the "Project Mogul" issue.

Internet exposure · derived from Shodan data

41 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running a version that maps to CVE-2009-3555, in our KEV-Exposure radar’s Shodan-derived sample.

across 13 countries (Poland, United States, Netherlands, Czechia, Japan)top: http_server
See the KEV-Exposure radar →Derived from Shodan data. Shodan data is owned by Shodan, which holds its copyright (© Shodan). EchelonGraph claims no ownership of it or copyright in it. Aggregate, host-redacted.

How it counts: every 12 hours, when Shodan query credits allow, the radar runs one Shodan query per tracked product, reads up to 100 ip:port services per query, and keeps a service when its banner version matches a CISA-KEV or high-EPSS CVE; a service is dropped when neither a search nor a Shodan InternetDB port re-check has refreshed it for 21 days. A re-check that finds the port still listed by Shodan InternetDB refreshes the service without re-reading the banner, so a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open. A count is a banner-version inference over a sample, not an exploit test and not an internet-wide census, and the unit is a service, not a machine: a machine answering on two ports counts twice.

CVSS v3
9.8
EG Score
9.8CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
94
EG Risk 94/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity98% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation87% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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 at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
87%
EPSS %ILE
99th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
87% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track* at medium mission impactTrack at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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

November 9, 2009

Last Modified

May 27, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Oct 8, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

G-SEC - Blog: TLS / SSLv3 renegotiation vulnerability explained (Update #2)(

http://blog.g-sec.lu/2009/11/tls-sslv3-renegotiation-vulnerability.html

Patch Availability(33)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntuapache2.2-common (2.2.12-1ubuntu2.1) @ karmic2026-11-02ubuntu
ubuntuapache2.2-common (2.2.11-2ubuntu2.7) @ jaunty2026-11-02ubuntu
ubuntulibnss3-1d (3.12.6-0ubuntu0.8.04.1) @ hardy2026-11-02ubuntu
redhatxstream-0:1.3.1-10.el72015-08-12redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-ibm-1:1.6.0.9.1-1jpp.1.el52011-06-16redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-ibm-1:1.6.0.9.0-1jpp.3.el52010-12-15redhat
redhatjava-1.4.2-ibm-sap-0:1.4.2.13.6.sap-1jpp.1.el52010-12-15redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-openjdk-1:1.6.0.0-1.31.b17.el6_02010-11-10redhat
redhatjava-1.5.0-ibm-1:1.5.0.12.2-1jpp.1.el52010-10-27redhat
redhatjava-1.4.2-ibm-0:1.4.2.13.6-1jpp.2.el52010-10-20redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-sun-1:1.6.0.22-1jpp.1.el52010-10-14redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-openjdk-1:1.6.0.0-1.16.b17.el52010-10-13redhat
redhatrhev-hypervisor-0:5.4-2.1.12.1.el5_4rhev2_12010-05-25redhat
redhatjava-1.4.2-ibm-0:1.4.2.13.4.sap-1jpp.1.el52010-05-12redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-sun-1:1.6.0.19-1jpp.1.el52010-04-01redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-openjdk-1:1.6.0.0-1.11.b16.el52010-04-01redhat
redhatjava-1.5.0-sun-0:1.5.0.22-1jpp.3.el52010-04-01redhat
redhatgnutls-0:1.4.1-3.el5_4.82010-03-25redhat
redhatopenssl-0:0.9.7a-43.17.el4_8.52010-03-25redhat
redhatopenssl-0:0.9.8e-12.el5_4.62010-03-25redhat
redhatopenssl097a-0:0.9.7a-9.el5_4.22010-03-25redhat
redhatnss-0:3.12.6-1.el5_42010-03-25redhat
redhatgnutls-0:1.0.20-4.el4_8.72010-03-25redhat
redhatjava-1.4.2-ibm-0:1.4.2.13.4-1jpp.1.el52010-03-17redhat
redhatjava-1.5.0-ibm-1:1.5.0.11.1-1jpp.3.el52010-03-03redhat
redhattomcat-native-0:1.1.19-2.0.1.ep5.el52010-02-23redhat
redhathttpd-0:2.2.10-11.ep5.el52010-01-06redhat
redhatjava-1.6.0-ibm-1:1.6.0.7-1jpp.2.el52009-12-23redhat
redhathttpd-0:2.0.52-41.ent.62009-11-11redhat
redhathttpd-0:2.2.3-31.el5_4.22009-11-11redhat
mavenorg.apache.tomcat:tomcat @ 6.0.32 (fixes >= 6.0.0, < 6.0.32)—ghsa
mavenorg.apache.tomcat:tomcat @ 5.5.33 (fixes >= 5.0.0, < 5.5.33)—ghsa
mavenorg.apache.tomcat:tomcat @ 7.0.10 (fixes >= 7.0.0, < 7.0.10)—ghsa

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.

Affected Packages

(36 across 10 ecosystems)
Debian:11(7)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
apache2—
  • every version up to 2.2.14-2: fixed in 2.2.14-2
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nginx—
  • every version up to 0.7.64-1: fixed in 0.7.64-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.12.6-1: fixed in 3.12.6-1
—
openssl—
  • every version up to 0.9.8k-6: fixed in 0.9.8k-6
—
pound—
  • every version up to 2.6-6.1: fixed in 2.6-6.1
—
tomcat-native—
  • every version up to 1.1.18-1: fixed in 1.1.18-1
—
Debian:13(7)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
apache2—
  • every version up to 2.2.14-2: fixed in 2.2.14-2
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nginx—
  • every version up to 0.7.64-1: fixed in 0.7.64-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.12.6-1: fixed in 3.12.6-1
—
openssl—
  • every version up to 0.9.8k-6: fixed in 0.9.8k-6
—
pound—
  • every version up to 2.6-6.1: fixed in 2.6-6.1
—
tomcat-native—
  • every version up to 1.1.18-1: fixed in 1.1.18-1
—
Debian:14(7)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
apache2—
  • every version up to 2.2.14-2: fixed in 2.2.14-2
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nginx—
  • every version up to 0.7.64-1: fixed in 0.7.64-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.12.6-1: fixed in 3.12.6-1
—
openssl—
  • every version up to 0.9.8k-6: fixed in 0.9.8k-6
—
pound—
  • every version up to 2.6-6.1: fixed in 2.6-6.1
—
tomcat-native—
  • every version up to 1.1.18-1: fixed in 1.1.18-1
—
Debian:12(6)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
apache2—
  • every version up to 2.2.14-2: fixed in 2.2.14-2
—
lighttpd—
  • every version up to 1.4.30-1: fixed in 1.4.30-1
—
nginx—
  • every version up to 0.7.64-1: fixed in 0.7.64-1
—
nss—
  • every version up to 3.12.6-1: fixed in 3.12.6-1
—
openssl—
  • every version up to 0.9.8k-6: fixed in 0.9.8k-6
—
tomcat-native—
  • every version up to 1.1.18-1: fixed in 1.1.18-1
—
Debian:5.0(3)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
apache22.2.9-10+lenny2, 2.2.9-10+lenny3, 2.2.9-10+lenny4, 2.2.9-10+lenny5
  • every version up to 2.2.9-10+lenny6: fixed in 2.2.9-10+lenny6
—
nss3.12.0-5 ... 3.12.3.1-0lenny2 (8 versions)
  • every version up to 3.12.3.1-0lenny3: fixed in 3.12.3.1-0lenny3
—
openssl0.9.8g-15 ... 0.9.8g-15+lenny9 (8 versions)
  • every version up to 0.9.8g-15+lenny11: fixed in 0.9.8g-15+lenny11
—
Debian:6.0(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
lighttpd1.4.28-2, 1.4.28-2+squeeze1, 1.4.28-2+squeeze1.1
  • every version up to 1.4.28-2+squeeze1.2: fixed in 1.4.28-2+squeeze1.2
—
pound2.5-1, 2.5-1.1, 2.6-1
  • every version up to 2.6-1+deb6u1: fixed in 2.6-1+deb6u1
—
Debian:4.0(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
apache22.2.3-4 ... 2.2.3-4+etch9 (10 versions)
  • every version up to 2.2.3-4+etch11: fixed in 2.2.3-4+etch11
—
Debian:7(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
pound2.6-2
  • every version up to 2.6-2+deb7u1: fixed in 2.6-2+deb7u1
—
Debian:8(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
pound2.6-6
  • every version up to 2.6-6+deb8u1: fixed in 2.6-6+deb8u1
—
Maven(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
org.apache.tomcat:tomcat—
  • 7.0.0 up to 7.0.10: fixed in 7.0.10
  • 6.0.0 up to 6.0.32: fixed in 6.0.32
  • 5.0.0 up to 5.5.33: fixed in 5.5.33
—

Weakness Classification(2)

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

Additional Vendor Advisories

(8)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 19× in last 7d / 54× 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.

Showing the most recent 92 of 133 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 8 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 41 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 15:22 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-11-02 15:22 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-11-02 15:21 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f7w7-6pjc-wwm6 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  4. 2026-11-01 14:55 UTCOSV refresh
  5. 2026-11-01 14:53 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-11-01 14:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f7w7-6pjc-wwm6 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  7. 2026-11-01 08:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f7w7-6pjc-wwm6 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  8. 2026-11-01 08:52 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-31 14:25 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-31 14:25 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-30 13:56 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-30 13:56 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-10-29 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-10-29 13:27 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-29 13:27 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-10-28 12:57 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-28 12:57 UTCVendor advisory
  18. 2026-10-27 12:28 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-27 12:28 UTCVendor advisory
  20. 2026-10-26 12:00 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-10-25 20:22 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-25 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  23. 2026-10-25 11:17 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-10-25 11:17 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-10-24 10:48 UTCEG score recompute
Show 67 more
  1. 2026-10-24 10:48 UTCVendor advisory
  2. 2026-10-23 10:19 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-23 10:19 UTCVendor advisory
  4. 2026-10-22 09:48 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-22 09:48 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-21 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  7. 2026-10-21 09:17 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-21 09:17 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-10-20 08:48 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-20 08:48 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-19 08:18 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-19 08:18 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-10-18 07:49 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-18 07:49 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-10-17 07:19 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-17 07:19 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-10-16 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-10-16 06:49 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-16 06:49 UTCVendor advisory
  20. 2026-10-15 05:32 UTCEG score recompute
  21. 2026-10-15 05:32 UTCVendor advisory
  22. 2026-10-14 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  23. 2026-10-14 01:10 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-10-14 01:10 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-10-12 21:18 UTCEG score recompute
  26. 2026-10-12 21:18 UTCVendor advisory
  27. 2026-10-12 01:52 UTCEG score recompute
  28. 2026-10-09 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  29. 2026-10-06 15:09 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  30. 2026-10-03 03:39 UTCOSV refresh
  31. 2026-09-29 08:00 UTCEG score recompute
  32. 2026-09-24 13:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  33. 2026-09-14 01:19 UTCOSV refresh
  34. 2026-09-12 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  35. 2026-09-10 09:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  36. 2026-09-06 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  37. 2026-09-05 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  38. 2026-09-04 13:55 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  39. 2026-08-28 21:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  40. 2026-08-27 14:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  41. 2026-08-26 02:39 UTCOSV refresh
  42. 2026-08-19 16:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  43. 2026-08-09 19:09 UTCOSV refresh
  44. 2026-08-06 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  45. 2026-08-03 10:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  46. 2026-07-30 16:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  47. 2026-07-25 14:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  48. 2026-07-24 19:41 UTCOSV refresh
  49. 2026-07-24 14:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  50. 2026-07-23 01:00 UTCEG score recompute
  51. 2026-07-23 00:37 UTCEG score recompute
  52. 2026-07-23 00:04 UTCEG score recompute
  53. 2026-07-22 21:43 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-07-22 14:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  55. 2026-07-15 16:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  56. 2026-07-13 06:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  57. 2026-07-11 08:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  58. 2026-07-07 15:11 UTCOSV refresh
  59. 2026-07-05 02:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  60. 2026-06-28 04:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  61. 2026-06-24 14:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  62. 2026-06-23 21:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  63. 2026-06-21 14:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  64. 2026-06-19 02:35 UTCOSV refresh
  65. 2026-06-17 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  66. 2026-06-15 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  67. 2026-06-14 23:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.3% · 89th percentile

Publicly available exploits

(3 references)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (2 Exploit-DB entries, 1 GitHub PoC). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.

  • Exploit-DBEDB-10579✓ verified
    Published Dec 21, 2009

    TLS - Renegotiation

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-10071✓ verified
    Published Nov 10, 2009

    Mozilla NSS - NULL Character CA SSL Certificate Validation Security Bypass

    Open source ↗
  • GitHub PoCjohnwchadwick/cve-2009-3555-test-server
    Published Mar 30, 2022

    A TLS server using a vendored fork of the Go TLS stack that has renegotation indication extension forcibly disabled.

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2009-3555?
CVE-2009-3555 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 9, 2009. The TLS protocol, and the SSL protocol 3.0 and possibly earlier, as used in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.0, mod_ssl in the Apache HTTP Server 2.2.14 and earlier, OpenSSL before 0.9.8l, GnuTLS 2.8.5 and earlier, Mozilla Network Security Services (NSS) 3.12.4 and earlier, multiple…
When was CVE-2009-3555 made public?
CVE-2009-3555 was made public on November 4, 2009: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, Red Hat, Inc., gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on November 9, 2009. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of May 27, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2009-3555 actively exploited?
CVE-2009-3555 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. EchelonGraph's EG-KEV model places it in Tier 2 (Weaponized), which is not evidence of exploitation: Exploit-DB marks a public exploit for it as verified, and CISA's SSVC data says a public PoC exists and its EPSS is 50% or more. EchelonGraph does not test whether exploit code works. FIRST EPSS estimates a 87% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2009-3555?
CVE-2009-3555 has a CVSS v3 base score of 9.8 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2009-3555?
A fix for CVE-2009-3555 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2009-3555 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2009-3555

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2009-3555?

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