OpenSSL 3.0.0 < 3.0.22 Multiple Vulnerabilities

#%NASL_MIN_LEVEL 80900
##
# (C) Tenable, Inc.
##

include('compat.inc');

if (description)
{
  script_id(339518);
  script_version("1.1");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"plugin_modification_date", value:"2026/08/25");

  script_cve_id(
    "CVE-2026-54874",
    "CVE-2026-63072",
    "CVE-2026-63074",
    "CVE-2026-63076",
    "CVE-2026-75803"
  );

  script_name(english:"OpenSSL 3.0.0 < 3.0.22 Multiple Vulnerabilities");

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"synopsis", value:
"The remote service is affected by multiple vulnerabilities.");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"description", value:
"The version of OpenSSL installed on the remote host is prior to 3.0.22. It is, therefore, affected by multiple
vulnerabilities as referenced in the 3.0.22 advisory.

  - 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. (CVE-2026-63076)

  - Issue summary: ChaCha20-Poly1305 and AES-OCB decryption with an empty ciphertext can report success
    without verifying the supplied authentication tag when the operation is finalized by calling the
    EVP_Cipher() function. Impact summary: Applications calling EVP_Cipher() on an empty ciphertext and
    expecting the call to check the AEAD tag may accept forged messages. CWE: CWE-354 (Improper Validation of
    Integrity Check Value) Description: The EVP_Cipher() API call for AEAD ciphers behaves like a one shot
    encryption and decryption call. It also verifies the AEAD tag after the decryption operation. However for
    AES-OCB and ChaCha20-Poly1305 ciphers it skipped the AEAD tag verification when an empty ciphertext was
    passed to the function. The callers of this function might believe that a successful return indicates a
    valid AEAD tag for these ciphers, even when that has not truly been validated in this case. FIPS impact:
    no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected algorithms
    are not FIPS approved and thus not implemented in the FIPS module. (CVE-2026-75803)

  - Issue summary: The OpenSSL Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) caches additional certificates
    (extraCerts) sent in a CMP message, but never expunges them (for instance if they are invalid). If a
    server reuses an OSSL_CMP_CTX frequently, this cache of extraCerts may grow unboundedly, and a malicious
    client may flood a CMP server with requests driving this growth. Impact summary: Users utilizing a CMP
    server that reuses a single OSSL_CMP_CTX for the lifetime of a server process may observe unbounded memory
    growth in the event a malicious client repeatedly sends requests containing unique extra certificates,
    which may lead to OOM conditions. CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
    Description: If a remote user sends CMP messages to a server with a list of extraCerts and the message is
    rejected, the extraCerts from the message remains in the server contexts untrusted certificate stack. This
    exposes servers with long lived ctx objects to Denial of Service attacks in which an attacker sends
    messages intending to be rejected with a large list of additional certificates repeatedly, forcing the
    server to store them indefinitely. The issue was fixed by removing the added extra certs if the message is
    rejected, using the same method as when the context is configured to not do caching at all. FIPS impact:
    no As the CMP code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.
    (CVE-2026-63074)

  - Issue summary: OpenSSL CMS decryption sizes the key-unwrap output buffer based on querying the unwrapped
    key size, but the AES-WRAP-PAD unwrap primitive can write and cleanse more bytes than that query reports,
    causing an 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write. Impact summary: An attacker who supplies a crafted CMS message
    can trigger a deterministic 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write when the victim decrypts it with
    CMS_decrypt(), corrupting the heap and typically resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-787: Out-of-
    bounds Write Description: The key-wrap OID is potentially attacker-controlled on the wire. CMS unwrapping
    allows both id-aesNNN-wrap-pad and id-aesNNN-wrap ciphers. An attacker can take a legitimate message and
    change a single OID byte to select the padded variant while leaving the message otherwise valid. Since the
    unwrap key is derived from the recipient's private operation (ECDH key agreement or ML-KEM decapsulation),
    the RFC 5649 integrity check cannot pass, and the decryption fails with integrity failure. The write is a
    fixed-size (8-byte), fixed-value (zero) heap overflow immediately past the allocation, requires no special
    configuration, and is reachable from the public CMS_decrypt() function. The consequence is a heap
    corruption leading to a Denial of Service. The fix in the CMS code sizes the unwrap output buffer for the
    worst case so a failed unwrap cannot write past the allocation. FIPS impact: no As the CMS code lives
    outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE. (CVE-2026-63072)

  - Issue summary: Receiving a DTLS record for a future epoch while a handshake is in progress causes OpenSSL
    to buffer far more memory than the record itself requires. Impact summary: A peer can use a small amount
    of network traffic to make an OpenSSL DTLS endpoint retain a disproportionately large amount of memory,
    which may lead to a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-405: Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification)
    Description: While a DTLS handshake is in progress, a peer may legitimately have already moved on to the
    next epoch (for example, having sent its ChangeCipherSpec and Finished messages) before the local endpoint
    has processed the same transition, typically because of reordering on the underlying UDP transport.
    OpenSSL buffers such early records so that they can be processed once the local endpoint catches up.
    Buffering a record currently retains the entire read buffer it arrived in, which is sized to hold the
    largest possible DTLS record (around 16 kilobytes), rather than just the bytes that make up the record
    itself. Up to 100 such records may be buffered per connection. As a result, a peer that sends a stream of
    small forged records claiming to belong to the next epoch can cause an OpenSSL DTLS endpoint to retain
    around 1.7 megabytes of memory, despite sending only a small fraction of that amount of data over the
    network. An attacker therefore gains a memory amplification factor of around 1200, and can multiply the
    effect across as many associations as it is able to open, making this a remote memory exhaustion Denial of
    Service risk for DTLS servers. Since the memory retained per connection remains bounded, and any limit an
    application already places on the number of concurrent associations also bounds the total exposure, this
    issue has been assessed as Low severity. FIPS impact: no No FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the
    affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. OpenSSL 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.0, 1.1.1 and
    1.0.2 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 4.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 4.0.2. OpenSSL 3.6 users
    should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.4. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.8. OpenSSL 3.4 users
    should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.4.7. OpenSSL 3.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.0.22. Premium support
    customers only: OpenSSL 1.1.1 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1zi OpenSSL 1.0.2 users should upgrade
    to OpenSSL 1.0.2zr This issue was reported on 18 May 2026 by Amazon Web Services. The fix has been
    developed by Matt Caswell. -- cut (non-publishing metadata for internal use) -- Reported by: Amazon Web
    Services Fixed by: Matt Caswell (CVE-2026-54874)

Note that Nessus has not tested for these issues but has instead relied only on the application's self-reported version
number.");
  # https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/119ab9555dc62275bbd71f6f49529b1a44feba42
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?c90e11a2");
  # https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/21a5d9658b0c66daace60e10ea18ff32a448de9f
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?49dc703b");
  # https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/37882aa2e0256e1072442a8f62f7db45b995c45b
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?659deec2");
  # https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a0c8ec557d9cac078f032d76cdf684fe743eb382
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?143bdd0b");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260825.txt");
  # https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/index.html
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?eac4598c");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-54874");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-63072");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-63074");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-63076");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-75803");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"solution", value:
"Upgrade to OpenSSL version 3.0.22 or later.");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"agent", value:"all");
  script_set_cvss_base_vector("CVSS2#AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C");
  script_set_cvss_temporal_vector("CVSS2#E:U/RL:OF/RC:C");
  script_set_cvss3_base_vector("CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H");
  script_set_cvss3_temporal_vector("CVSS:3.0/E:U/RL:O/RC:C");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"cvss_score_source", value:"CVE-2026-63076");

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"exploitability_ease", value:"No known exploits are available");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"exploit_available", value:"false");

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"vuln_publication_date", value:"2026/08/25");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"patch_publication_date", value:"2026/08/25");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"plugin_publication_date", value:"2026/08/25");

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"plugin_type", value:"combined");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"cpe", value:"cpe:/a:openssl:openssl");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"generated_plugin", value:"current");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"thorough_tests", value:"true");
  script_end_attributes();

  script_category(ACT_GATHER_INFO);
  script_family(english:"Web Servers");

  script_copyright(english:"This script is Copyright (C) 2026 and is owned by Tenable, Inc. or an Affiliate thereof.");

  script_dependencies("openssl_version.nasl", "openssl_nix_installed.nbin", "openssl_win_installed.nbin");
  script_require_keys("installed_sw/OpenSSL");

  exit(0);
}

include('vcf.inc');
include('vcf_extras_openssl.inc');

var app_info = vcf::combined_get_app_info(app:'OpenSSL');

vcf::check_all_backporting(app_info:app_info);

var constraints = [
  { 'min_version' : '3.0.0', 'fixed_version' : '3.0.22' }
];

vcf::openssl::check_version_and_report(
    app_info:app_info,
    constraints:constraints,
    severity:SECURITY_HOLE
);