wolfSSL up to 5.8.0 RAND_poll random values

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.
6.7$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in wolfSSL up to 5.8.0. This issue affects the function RAND_poll. Performing a manipulation results in random values. This vulnerability is reported as CVE-2025-7394. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in wolfSSL up to 5.8.0. This affects the function RAND_poll. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a random values vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-330. The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:

In the OpenSSL compatibility layer implementation, the function RAND_poll() was not behaving as expected and leading to the potential for predictable values returned from RAND_bytes() after fork() is called. This can lead to weak or predictable random numbers generated in applications that are both using RAND_bytes() and doing fork() operations. This only affects applications explicitly calling RAND_bytes() after fork() and does not affect any internal TLS operations. Although RAND_bytes() documentation in OpenSSL calls out not being safe for use with fork() without first calling RAND_poll(), an additional code change was also made in wolfSSL to make RAND_bytes() behave similar to OpenSSL after a fork() call without calling RAND_poll(). Now the Hash-DRBG used gets reseeded after detecting running in a new process. If making use of RAND_bytes() and calling fork() we recommend updating to the latest version of wolfSSL. Thanks to Per Allansson from Appgate for the report.

The weakness was disclosed by Per Allansson. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2025-7394 since 07/09/2025. The exploitability is told to be difficult. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. No form of authentication is needed for exploitation. Technical details of the vulnerability are known, but there is no available exploit. The attack technique deployed by this issue is T1600.001 according to MITRE ATT&CK.

Upgrading eliminates this vulnerability. The upgrade is hosted for download at github.com.

The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at EUVD (EUVD-2025-21938). Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.

Productinfo

Name

Version

License

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CNA CVSS-B Score: 🔒
CNA CVSS-BT Score: 🔒
CNA Vector: 🔒

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.7
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.7

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

NVD Base Score: 9.8
NVD Vector: 🔒

CVSSv2info

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

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

Exploitinginfo

Class: Random values
CWE: CWE-330 / CWE-310
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

Threat Intelligenceinfo

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

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: Upgrade
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔒

Upgrade: github.com

Timelineinfo

07/09/2025 CVE reserved
07/19/2025 +10 days Advisory disclosed
07/19/2025 +0 days VulDB entry created
12/03/2025 +137 days VulDB entry last update

Sourcesinfo

Researcher: Per Allansson
Status: Confirmed

CVE: CVE-2025-7394 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-7394
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-316947
EUVD: 🔒

Entryinfo

Created: 07/19/2025 05:45
Updated: 12/03/2025 17:08
Changes: 07/19/2025 05:45 (66), 07/19/2025 11:34 (1), 12/03/2025 17:08 (12)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

◂ PreviousOverviewNext ▸

Do you want to use VulDB in your project?

Use the official API to access entries easily!