CVE-2026-35191

LOWPre-NVD 3.73.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 3.7 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: LOW) published 2026-09-29. CISA-ADP (Vulnrichment) CVSS v3.1 baseline 3.7; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: CISA-ADP (Vulnrichment) CVSS v3.1, EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory
Trending — 5 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-89002 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

3.7EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.7%CVSS: 3.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address validation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its unvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000 unvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data received.

Impact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the OpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of a DDoS attack.

CWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation

Description: OpenSSL's QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client address validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not used for a traffic amplification attack. If this feature is disabled on the server, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3 times the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the TLS handshake is completed.

The OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the length of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when processing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may, after establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a subsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to account the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting in the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has, thereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC.

FIPS impact: no As the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.

CVSS v3
3.7
EG Score
3.7LOWmedium confidence
EG Risk
17
EG Risk 17/100

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)
Severity37% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 3.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.7% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (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
0.7%
EPSS %ILE
54th
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 (3.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 3.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
3.7 LOWCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.7% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade 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 every mission impact level.

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

Exploitation none (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.

The score's inputs: 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

September 29, 2026

Last Modified

October 8, 2026

Patch Availability(3)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntuopenssl-provider-legacy (3.5.5-1ubuntu3.6) @ resolute2026-10-29ubuntu
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.

Affected Packages

(2 across 2 ecosystems)
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl3.5.1-1 ... 3.5.7-1~deb13u2 (14 versions)
  • every version up to 3.5.7-1~deb13u3: fixed in 3.5.7-1~deb13u3
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl3.5.1-1 ... 3.6.4-1 (24 versions)
  • every version up to 3.6.5-1: fixed in 3.6.5-1
—

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 14× 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.

  1. 2026-11-01 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 54th percentile
  2. 2026-10-31 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 54th percentile
  3. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 53rd percentile
  4. 2026-10-29 18:33 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-29 18:33 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-29 18:33 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 · GitHub severity LOW · GitHub CVSS 3.7
  7. 2026-10-29 17:53 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-29 17:53 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-10-29 17:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 · GitHub severity LOW · GitHub CVSS 3.7
  10. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 53rd percentile
  11. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 53rd percentile
  12. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 53rd percentile
  13. 2026-10-27 07:55 UTCOSV refresh
  14. 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 53rd percentile
  15. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.7% · 53rd percentile
  16. 2026-10-25 14:33 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 28th percentile
  18. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 28th percentile
  19. 2026-10-22 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 28th percentile
  20. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 28th percentile
  21. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 28th percentile
  22. 2026-10-19 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  23. 2026-10-18 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  24. 2026-10-18 03:45 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-17 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
Show 42 more
  1. 2026-10-16 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  2. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  3. 2026-10-14 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  4. 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  5. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  6. 2026-10-12 16:12 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 19:54 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 17:07 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-11 14:34 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-11 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  11. 2026-10-11 03:34 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-11 03:34 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-10-11 03:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 · GitHub severity LOW · GitHub CVSS 3.7
  14. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  15. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  16. 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  17. 2026-10-08 01:11 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-08 01:11 UTCVendor advisory
  19. 2026-10-08 01:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 · GitHub severity LOW · GitHub CVSS 3.7
  20. 2026-10-07 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  21. 2026-10-07 02:16 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-07 02:16 UTCVendor advisory
  23. 2026-10-07 02:16 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 · GitHub severity LOW · GitHub CVSS 3.7
  24. 2026-10-06 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  25. 2026-10-05 17:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  26. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  27. 2026-10-03 23:54 UTCEG score recompute
  28. 2026-10-03 23:54 UTCVendor advisory
  29. 2026-10-03 23:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663 · GitHub severity LOW · GitHub CVSS 3.7
  30. 2026-10-03 14:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  31. 2026-10-01 19:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 27th percentile
  32. 2026-09-30 21:29 UTCVendor advisory
  33. 2026-09-30 21:29 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663
  34. 2026-09-30 20:26 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 3.7 LOW
  35. 2026-09-30 20:26 UTCVendor advisory
  36. 2026-09-30 20:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663
  37. 2026-09-30 20:25 UTCMITRE cvelistV5CVSS v3 → 3.7 · severity → LOW
  38. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  39. 2026-09-29 22:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5p85-47cf-3663
  40. 2026-09-29 16:24 UTCNVD update
  41. 2026-09-29 15:38 UTCEG score recompute
  42. 2026-09-29 15:38 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-35191?
CVE-2026-35191 is a low-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 29, 2026. Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address validation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its unvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000 unvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data…
When was CVE-2026-35191 made public?
CVE-2026-35191 was made public on September 29, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, OpenSSL Software Foundation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on September 29, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 8, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-35191 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-35191 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.7% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (54th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-35191?
CVE-2026-35191 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 3.7 (CISA-ADP / Vulnrichment enrichment; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-35191?
A fix for CVE-2026-35191 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-35191 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-2026-35191

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-35191?

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