| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Memory leak in the SRP_VBASE_get_by_user implementation in OpenSSL 1.0.1 before 1.0.1s and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2g allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) by providing an invalid username in a connection attempt, related to apps/s_server.c and crypto/srp/srp_vfy.c. |
| The certificate parser in OpenSSL before 1.0.1u and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2i might allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read) via crafted certificate operations, related to s3_clnt.c and s3_srvr.c. |
| statem/statem.c in OpenSSL 1.1.0a does not consider memory-block movement after a realloc call, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (use-after-free) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted TLS session. |
| The state-machine implementation in OpenSSL 1.1.0 before 1.1.0a allocates memory before checking for an excessive length, which might allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via crafted TLS messages, related to statem/statem.c and statem/statem_lib.c. |
| The ssl3_read_bytes function in record/rec_layer_s3.c in OpenSSL 1.1.0 before 1.1.0a allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) by triggering a zero-length record in an SSL_peek call. |
| Multiple memory leaks in t1_lib.c in OpenSSL before 1.0.1u, 1.0.2 before 1.0.2i, and 1.1.0 before 1.1.0a allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via large OCSP Status Request extensions. |
| The tls_decrypt_ticket function in ssl/t1_lib.c in OpenSSL before 1.1.0 does not consider the HMAC size during validation of the ticket length, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a ticket that is too short. |
| Integer underflow in the EVP_DecodeUpdate function in crypto/evp/encode.c in the base64-decoding implementation in OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory corruption) or possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted base64 data that triggers a buffer overflow. |
| The PKCS#7 implementation in OpenSSL before 0.9.8zf, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0r, 1.0.1 before 1.0.1m, and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2a does not properly handle a lack of outer ContentInfo, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and application crash) by leveraging an application that processes arbitrary PKCS#7 data and providing malformed data with ASN.1 encoding, related to crypto/pkcs7/pk7_doit.c and crypto/pkcs7/pk7_lib.c. |
| Race condition in the ssl3_get_new_session_ticket function in ssl/s3_clnt.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8zg, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0s, 1.0.1 before 1.0.1n, and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2b, when used for a multi-threaded client, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (double free and application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact by providing a NewSessionTicket during an attempt to reuse a ticket that had been obtained earlier. |
| The dtls1_get_message_fragment function in d1_both.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (recursion and client crash) via a DTLS hello message in an invalid DTLS handshake. |
| The do_ssl3_write function in s3_pkt.c in OpenSSL 1.x through 1.0.1g, when SSL_MODE_RELEASE_BUFFERS is enabled, does not properly manage a buffer pointer during certain recursive calls, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and application crash) via vectors that trigger an alert condition. |
| The mime_param_cmp function in crypto/asn1/asn_mime.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8u and 1.x before 1.0.0h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and application crash) via a crafted S/MIME message, a different vulnerability than CVE-2006-7250. |
| Double free vulnerability in OpenSSL 0.9.8 before 0.9.8s, when X509_V_FLAG_POLICY_CHECK is enabled, allows remote attackers to have an unspecified impact by triggering failure of a policy check. |
| crypto/bn/bn_nist.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8h on 32-bit platforms, as used in stunnel and other products, in certain circumstances involving ECDH or ECDHE cipher suites, uses an incorrect modular reduction algorithm in its implementation of the P-256 and P-384 NIST elliptic curves, which allows remote attackers to obtain the private key of a TLS server via multiple handshake attempts. |
| RSA verification recovery in the EVP_PKEY_verify_recover function in OpenSSL 1.x before 1.0.0a, as used by pkeyutl and possibly other applications, returns uninitialized memory upon failure, which might allow context-dependent attackers to bypass intended key requirements or obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information. |
| The Server Gated Cryptography (SGC) implementation in OpenSSL before 0.9.8s and 1.x before 1.0.0f does not properly handle handshake restarts, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via unspecified vectors. |
| Multiple integer signedness errors in crypto/buffer/buffer.c in OpenSSL 0.9.8v allow remote attackers to conduct buffer overflow attacks, and cause a denial of service (memory corruption) or possibly have unspecified other impact, via crafted DER data, as demonstrated by an X.509 certificate or an RSA public key. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2012-2110. |
| The GOST ENGINE in OpenSSL before 1.0.0f does not properly handle invalid parameters for the GOST block cipher, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via crafted data from a TLS client. |
| OpenSSL before 0.9.8l, and 0.9.8m through 1.x, does not properly restrict client-initiated renegotiation within the SSL and TLS protocols, which might make it easier for remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) by performing many renegotiations within a single connection, a different vulnerability than CVE-2011-5094. NOTE: it can also be argued that it is the responsibility of server deployments, not a security library, to prevent or limit renegotiation when it is inappropriate within a specific environment |
