OpenSSL up to 3.4.0 RFC7250 Raw Public Key error condition

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
3.6$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in OpenSSL up to 3.4.0. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component RFC7250 Raw Public Key Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to error condition. This vulnerability is handled as CVE-2024-12797. The attack can be executed remotely. There is not any exploit available. You should upgrade the affected component.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability has been found in OpenSSL up to 3.4.0 and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects some unknown functionality of the component RFC7250 Raw Public Key Handler. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a error condition vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-392. The product encounters an error but does not provide a status code or return value to indicate that an error has occurred. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality. CVE summarizes:

Issue summary: Clients using RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs) to authenticate a server may fail to notice that the server was not authenticated, because handshakes don't abort as expected when the SSL_VERIFY_PEER verification mode is set. Impact summary: TLS and DTLS connections using raw public keys may be vulnerable to man-in-middle attacks when server authentication failure is not detected by clients. RPKs are disabled by default in both TLS clients and TLS servers. The issue only arises when TLS clients explicitly enable RPK use by the server, and the server, likewise, enables sending of an RPK instead of an X.509 certificate chain. The affected clients are those that then rely on the handshake to fail when the server's RPK fails to match one of the expected public keys, by setting the verification mode to SSL_VERIFY_PEER. Clients that enable server-side raw public keys can still find out that raw public key verification failed by calling SSL_get_verify_result(), and those that do, and take appropriate action, are not affected. This issue was introduced in the initial implementation of RPK support in OpenSSL 3.2. The FIPS modules in 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.

The weakness was released by Apple Inc.. The advisory is shared for download at openssl-library.org. This vulnerability was named CVE-2024-12797 since 12/19/2024. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The attack can be initiated remotely. No form of authentication is required for a successful exploitation. There are neither technical details nor an exploit publicly available. The current price for an exploit might be approx. USD $0-$5k (estimation calculated on 04/10/2026).

The vulnerability scanner Nessus provides a plugin with the ID 216104 (RHEL 9 : openssl (RHSA-2025:1330)), which helps to determine the existence of the flaw in a target environment.

Upgrading to version 3.2.4, 3.3.3 or 3.4.1 eliminates this vulnerability. Applying the patch 738d4f9fdeaad57660dcba50a619fafced3fd5e9 is able to eliminate this problem. The bugfix is ready for download at github.com. The best possible mitigation is suggested to be upgrading to the latest version.

The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at Tenable (216104) and CERT Bund (WID-SEC-2025-1850). Once again VulDB remains the best source for vulnerability data.

Affected

  • Xerox FreeFlow Print Server

Productinfo

Type

Name

Version

License

Website

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 3.7
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 3.6

VulDB Base Score: 3.7
VulDB Temp Score: 3.6
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Error condition
CWE: CWE-392
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍

Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes

Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined

EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍

Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍

0-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Nessus ID: 216104
Nessus Name: RHEL 9 : openssl (RHSA-2025:1330)

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: Upgrade
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔍

Upgrade: OpenSSL 3.2.4/3.3.3/3.4.1
Patch: 738d4f9fdeaad57660dcba50a619fafced3fd5e9

Timelineinfo

12/19/2024 🔍
02/11/2025 +54 days 🔍
02/11/2025 +0 days 🔍
04/10/2026 +423 days 🔍

Sourcesinfo

Product: openssl.org

Advisory: openssl-library.org
Researcher: Apple Inc.
Status: Confirmed

CVE: CVE-2024-12797 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2024-12797
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-295276
CERT Bund: WID-SEC-2025-1850 - Xerox FreeFlow Print Server: Mehrere Schwachstellen ermöglichen nicht spezifizierten Angriff

Entryinfo

Created: 02/11/2025 17:56
Updated: 04/10/2026 08:56
Changes: 02/11/2025 17:56 (57), 02/12/2025 06:37 (2), 02/12/2025 11:23 (1), 08/15/2025 17:52 (7), 04/10/2026 08:56 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216:02E:103

Once again VulDB remains the best source for vulnerability data.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

Do you want to use VulDB in your project?

Use the official API to access entries easily!