CVE Tools

CVE-2026-75806

Unauthenticated and Undersized DTLS 1.2 AEAD Record Causes DoS

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 31st percentile. Fixed versions are out.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

What to do

Find your product and version, then upgrade to the build on the right.

  • OpenSSLAffected: ≥ 4.0.0, < 4.0.3Upgrade to: 4.0.3Affected: ≥ 3.6.0, < 3.6.5Upgrade to: 3.6.5Affected: ≥ 3.5.0, < 3.5.9Upgrade to: 3.5.9Affected: ≥ 3.4.0, < 3.4.8Upgrade to: 3.4.8 + 2 more branchesStated by: CVE record

Versions as the sources state them. Full version matrix after sign-in

What it is

From the CVE record

Issue summary: An established DTLS 1.2 association using an AEAD cipher suite can be terminated by a single unauthenticated datagram whose encrypted fragment is shorter than the mandatory explicit IV and authentication tag overhead. Impact summary: An attacker who can send a datagram that is routed to an existing DTLS 1.2 association can tear that association down without knowing any key material. This is a Denial of Service limited to the targeted association. There is no memory safety or confidentiality impact. CWE: CWE-1284: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input Description: In TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 every record protected by an AEAD cipher suite carries an explicit IV followed by the ciphertext and an authentication tag. When decrypting such a record the record layer passed the record length to the cipher implementation before checking that the record was long enough to contain the explicit IV and the tag. For a record shorter than that overhead the cipher implementation rejected the impossible length, and the record layer treated this as an internal failure and raised a fatal internal_error alert instead of treating the record as one that failed authentication. In TLS 1.2 the same record causes a fatal internal_error alert instead of the expected bad_record_mac alert. Since any undecryptable record already terminates a TLS connection, this is a protocol conformance issue rather than a security issue in TLS. The fix validates the record length against the explicit IV and tag length before any AEAD processing, so that TLS reports bad_record_mac and DTLS silently discards the record. FIPS impact: no The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS31st
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

0.4% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 31st percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

6 events over 9 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Patch availablerecord updated
  2. Publishedweakness classified, record updated, record updated

Affected products

And 1 more affected product. See all after sign-in

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

Scored 5.3 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
  • Attack Complexity LowNo special conditions — the attack can be reliably reproduced
  • Privileges Required NoneNo authentication required — anyone can exploit this
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality NoneNo confidentiality impact
  • Integrity NoneNo integrity impact
  • Availability LowReduced performance or intermittent disruption of service

Weaknesses

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for OpenSSL, not every advisory.