CVE-2026-63076

HIGHPre-NVD 7.57.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 7.5 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-08-25. CISA-ADP (Vulnrichment) CVSS v3.1 baseline 7.5; sources differ by 0.0.

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

Also known asEUVD-2026-65487 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 1.6%CVSS: 7.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

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.

CVSS v3
7.5
EG Score
7.5HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
49
EG Risk 49/100

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)
Severity75% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.5 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation1.6% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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 at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
1.6%
EPSS %ILE
76th
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 (7.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.5 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
1.6% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-10). 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 low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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 low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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

August 25, 2026

Last Modified

September 11, 2026

Advisory Details (4)

Auto-updated Aug 25, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_commit.
GitHub commit

commit 37882aa2e025 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit 37882aa2e025 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/37882aa2e0256e1072442a8f62f7db45b995c45b
GitHub commit

commit a1f348ccb328 (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit a1f348ccb328 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a1f348ccb328c3afbd4ba6883f9b7c813c043259
GitHub commit

commit a17cc8d612ec (openssl/openssl)

Fix landed in openssl/openssl commit a17cc8d612ec — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a17cc8d612ecff6d94a9b7ca8b5283ddf5ff570e

Patch Availability(21)

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

(7 across 7 ecosystems)
Alpine:v3.21(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • 3.0.0 up to 3.3.7-r1: fixed in 3.3.7-r1
—
Alpine:v3.22(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • 3.0.0 up to 3.5.8-r0: fixed in 3.5.8-r0
—
Alpine:v3.23(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • 3.0.0 up to 3.5.8-r0: fixed in 3.5.8-r0
—
Alpine:v3.24(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl—
  • 3.0.0 up to 3.5.8-r0: fixed in 3.5.8-r0
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl3.0.10-1 ... 3.0.9-1 (23 versions)
  • every version up to 3.0.22-1~deb12u1: fixed in 3.0.22-1~deb12u1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl3.5.1-1 ... 3.5.7-1~deb13u1 (13 versions)
  • every version up to 3.5.7-1~deb13u2: fixed in 3.5.7-1~deb13u2
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
openssl3.5.1-1 ... 3.6.3-1 (23 versions)
  • every version up to 3.6.4-1: fixed in 3.6.4-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Additional Vendor Advisories

(4)

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 9× in last 7d / 37× 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 its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). 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). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 310 rows on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 210 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-13 16:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 76th percentile
  2. 2026-11-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 76th percentile
  3. 2026-11-11 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 76th percentile
  4. 2026-11-11 15:04 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-11-11 15:04 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-11-11 15:04 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  7. 2026-11-10 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 76th percentile
  8. 2026-11-09 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  9. 2026-11-08 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  10. 2026-11-07 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  11. 2026-11-06 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  12. 2026-11-05 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  13. 2026-11-04 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  14. 2026-11-04 10:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-04 10:47 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-11-04 10:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  17. 2026-11-03 16:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  18. 2026-11-02 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  19. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  20. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  21. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  22. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  23. 2026-10-28 06:30 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-10-28 06:30 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-10-28 06:29 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  2. 2026-10-26 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  3. 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  4. 2026-10-25 14:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  6. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  7. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  8. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  9. 2026-10-20 18:52 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  10. 2026-10-20 18:52 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-20 18:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  12. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  13. 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  14. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  15. 2026-10-18 03:23 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  16. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  17. 2026-10-16 16:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  18. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  19. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  20. 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  21. 2026-10-13 12:04 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-10-13 12:04 UTCVendor advisory
  23. 2026-10-13 12:04 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  24. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  25. 2026-10-12 15:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  26. 2026-10-11 19:33 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  27. 2026-10-11 16:48 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  28. 2026-10-11 14:10 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  29. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  30. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  31. 2026-10-10 12:06 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  32. 2026-10-10 12:06 UTCVendor advisory
  33. 2026-10-10 12:06 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  34. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  35. 2026-10-09 04:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  36. 2026-10-09 04:25 UTCVendor advisory
  37. 2026-10-09 04:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  38. 2026-10-08 17:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  39. 2026-10-08 03:19 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  40. 2026-10-08 03:19 UTCVendor advisory
  41. 2026-10-08 03:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  42. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  43. 2026-10-07 06:32 UTCVendor advisory
  44. 2026-10-07 06:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  45. 2026-10-06 19:19 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  46. 2026-10-06 19:19 UTCVendor advisory
  47. 2026-10-06 19:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  48. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 75th percentile
  49. 2026-10-06 07:43 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  50. 2026-10-06 07:43 UTCVendor advisory
  51. 2026-10-06 07:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  52. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 74th percentile
  53. 2026-10-05 17:02 UTCVendor advisory
  54. 2026-10-05 17:02 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  55. 2026-10-05 03:58 UTCVendor advisory
  56. 2026-10-05 03:58 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  57. 2026-10-04 15:45 UTCVendor advisory
  58. 2026-10-04 15:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  59. 2026-10-04 04:34 UTCVendor advisory
  60. 2026-10-04 04:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  61. 2026-10-03 17:21 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  62. 2026-10-03 17:21 UTCVendor advisory
  63. 2026-10-03 17:21 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  64. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 74th percentile
  65. 2026-10-03 06:10 UTCVendor advisory
  66. 2026-10-03 06:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  67. 2026-10-02 18:53 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  68. 2026-10-02 18:53 UTCVendor advisory
  69. 2026-10-02 18:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  70. 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.6% · 74th percentile
  71. 2026-10-02 07:26 UTCVendor advisory
  72. 2026-10-02 07:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5
  73. 2026-10-01 20:14 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  74. 2026-10-01 20:14 UTCVendor advisory
  75. 2026-10-01 20:14 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-r3hf-pf7x-wgqg · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.5

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-63076?
CVE-2026-63076 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on August 25, 2026. 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…
When was CVE-2026-63076 made public?
CVE-2026-63076 was made public on August 25, 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 August 25, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of September 11, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-63076 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-63076 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 1.6% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (76th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-63076?
CVE-2026-63076 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (CISA-ADP / Vulnrichment enrichment; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-63076?
A fix for CVE-2026-63076 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-63076 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-2026-63076

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-63076?

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