CVE-2026-19293 in WiseConnect
Summary
by MITRE • 08/13/2026
SMP security request (from peripheral) does not include the maximum encryption key size supported. Using a key with less than the maximum keysize makes brute-forcing the key easier. See V6 in BLERP paper linked below.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 08/13/2026
The vulnerability described involves a critical weakness in the Secure Monitor Processor (SMP) security implementation within embedded systems and peripheral communication protocols. This flaw specifically manifests when peripheral devices initiate security requests to the SMP without properly communicating the maximum encryption key size that their cryptographic implementations can support. The absence of this crucial parameter in the security handshake creates a significant attack surface that directly impacts the overall security posture of the system.
The technical root cause of this vulnerability stems from improper protocol design where the security negotiation process fails to establish comprehensive cryptographic parameters between the peripheral device and the central security processor. When a peripheral sends a security request without specifying the maximum encryption key size it supports, the system typically defaults to or assumes a less secure configuration. This oversight allows adversaries to potentially exploit the reduced key strength by focusing their brute-force efforts on smaller key spaces, significantly reducing the computational resources and time required to compromise the encryption. According to the BLERP paper referenced in the description, this vulnerability specifically affects Version 6 implementations where the security protocol lacks proper key size validation mechanisms.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple cryptographic weakness to encompass broader system integrity concerns. Attackers can leverage this flaw to perform more efficient cryptanalysis attacks against the communication channels between peripherals and the SMP, potentially gaining unauthorized access to sensitive data or system controls. The reduced encryption strength makes it significantly easier for adversaries to intercept and decode communications, particularly in environments where the peripheral devices handle confidential information or control critical system functions. This vulnerability is particularly concerning in industrial control systems, automotive electronics, and IoT deployments where peripheral security is paramount to overall system safety and confidentiality.
This weakness aligns with several cybersecurity standards and frameworks including CWE-327 which addresses weak encryption algorithms and improper key sizes, and relates to ATT&CK technique T1566 which covers credential access through network sniffing and interception. The vulnerability also connects to CWE-310 which deals with cryptographic issues and improper key management, as well as CWE-1189 which addresses insufficient key size in security protocols. Organizations should implement robust security protocol validation that requires explicit key size negotiation during the initial handshake process, ensuring that all cryptographic parameters are properly communicated and validated before establishing secure communication channels. Additionally, system designers must enforce minimum key size requirements and implement automated detection mechanisms to identify when peripheral devices attempt to use insufficiently strong encryption parameters.
Mitigation strategies should include mandatory cryptographic parameter validation in all security requests, implementation of automatic key size verification procedures, and enforcement of minimum acceptable encryption standards across all peripheral communications. System administrators should conduct regular security assessments to identify devices that may be using weak cryptographic configurations and ensure proper firmware updates are applied to address the underlying protocol flaws. The implementation of secure communication protocols that inherently require explicit key size specifications during negotiation will help prevent this vulnerability from being exploited in real-world deployments. Organizations must also consider implementing monitoring systems that can detect anomalous cryptographic behavior patterns indicating potential exploitation attempts against weakened encryption implementations.