Issue summary: Parsing CMS AuthEnvelopedData or EnvelopedData message with
maliciously crafted AEAD parameters can trigger a stack buffer overflow.
Impact summary: A stack buffer overflow may lead to a crash, causing Denial
of Service, or potentially remote code execution.
When parsing CMS (Auth)EnvelopedData structures that use AEAD ciphers such as
AES-GCM, the IV (Initialization Vector) encoded in the ASN.1 parameters is
copied into a fixed-size stack buffer without verifying that its length fits
the destination. An attacker can supply a crafted CMS message with an
oversized IV, causing a stack-based out-of-bounds write before any
authentication or tag verification occurs.
Applications and services that parse untrusted CMS or PKCS#7 content using
AEAD ciphers (e.g., S/MIME (Auth)EnvelopedData with AES-GCM) are vulnerable.
Because the overflow occurs prior to authentication, no valid key material
is required to trigger it. While exploitability to remote code execution
depends on platform and toolchain mitigations, the stack-based write
primitive represents a severe risk.
The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3 and 3.0 are not affected by this
issue, as the CMS implementation is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module
boundary.
OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3 and 3.0 are vulnerable to this issue.
OpenSSL 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are not affected by this issue.
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
- 75% 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