OpenSSL up to 4.0.1 CMP OSSL_CMP_SRV_process_request protectionAlg null pointer dereference

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability has been found in OpenSSL up to 3.0.21/3.4.6/3.5.7/3.6.3/4.0.1 and classified as problematic. This impacts the function OSSL_CMP_SRV_process_request of the component CMP. This manipulation of the argument protectionAlg causes null pointer dereference. This vulnerability is handled as CVE-2026-63076. The attack can be initiated remotely. There is not any exploit available.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability has been found in OpenSSL up to 3.0.21/3.4.6/3.5.7/3.6.3/4.0.1 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function OSSL_CMP_SRV_process_request of the component CMP. The manipulation of the argument protectionAlg with an unknown input leads to a null pointer dereference vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-476. A NULL pointer dereference occurs when the application dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid, but is NULL, typically causing a crash or exit. As an impact it is known to affect availability. The summary by CVE is:

Issue summary: OpenSSL CMP password based protection verification only checks whether the protectionAlg parameter was not NULL and not its ASN.1 type, before treating it as a PBMParameter. A crafted message can contain a parameter of a different type, which is then dereferenced as an invalid pointer. Impact summary: A remote, unauthenticated attacker can crash an application acting as a CMP server that accepts PBM-protected messages, or a CMP client talking to a malicious or intercepted CMP server, resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference Description: When verifying the password-based MAC protection of a CMP message, OpenSSL library reads the protectionAlg algorithm parameter with X509_ALGOR_get0(), which returns both the parameter type and its value pointer. The value is then cast to an ASN1_STRING and treated as the expected PBMParameter after only checking that pointer is not NULL. The parameter type returned by X509_ALGOR_get0() was never consulted. This happens during protection verification, before any MAC is computed, so no knowledge of the PBM shared secret is required; the only precondition is that PBM verification is reachable. On the server side this is reached from OSSL_CMP_SRV_process_request() for any application that stands up a CMP server accepting PBM-protected messages, and on the client side from CMP response validation against a malicious or on-path (MITM) server. The reliable consequence is a denial of service; there is no memory disclosure, no controlled memory write, and no path to code execution. CMP is a specialized feature that an application must explicitly enable. FIPS impact: no As the CMP code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.

The advisory is shared at openssl-library.org. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2026-63076 since 07/15/2026. The exploitation appears to be easy. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploitation doesn't need any form of authentication. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 08/25/2026).

Upgrading to version 3.0.22, 3.4.7, 3.5.8, 3.6.4 or 4.0.2 eliminates this vulnerability.

Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.

Productinfo

Type

• Network Encryption Software

Name

• OpenSSL

Version

• 3.0.0
• 3.0.1
• 3.0.2
• 3.0.3
• 3.0.4
• 3.0.5
• 3.0.6
• 3.0.7
• 3.0.8
• 3.0.9
• 3.0.10
• 3.0.11
• 3.0.12
• 3.0.13
• 3.0.14
• 3.0.15
• 3.0.16
• 3.0.17
• 3.0.18
• 3.0.19
• 3.0.20
• 3.0.21
• 3.4.0
• 3.4.1
• 3.4.2
• 3.4.3
• 3.4.4
• 3.4.5
• 3.4.6
• 3.5.0
• 3.5.1
• 3.5.2
• 3.5.3
• 3.5.4
• 3.5.5
• 3.5.6
• 3.5.7
• 3.6.0
• 3.6.1
• 3.6.2
• 3.6.3
• 4.0.0
• 4.0.1

License

• open-source

Website

• Product: https://www.openssl.org/

CPE 2.3info

• 🔒
• 🔒
• 🔒

CPE 2.2info

• 🔒
• 🔒
• 🔒

CVSSv4info

CVSSv3info

CVSSv2info

Exploitinginfo

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Countermeasuresinfo

Timelineinfo

Sourcesinfo

Entryinfo

Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.

Discussion