CVE-2026-2673
Openssl 3.5.0 – 3.5.6
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-2673 is a medium-severity Algorithm Downgrade (CWE-757) vulnerability in Openssl Openssl. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Downgrade Attack (T1689); ranked at the 36th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) and SC-8 (Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-2673 is a vulnerability in OpenSSL TLS 1.3 servers that causes failure to negotiate the expected preferred key exchange group when the configuration includes the 'DEFAULT' keyword to interpolate the built-in default group list. This defect results in the 'DEFAULT' list losing its 'tuple' structure, treating all server-supported groups as a single tuple and preventing the server from sending a Hello Retry Request (HRR) even when a more preferred group is mutually supported but not in the client's initial predicted keyshares. The issue affects OpenSSL versions 3.5 and 3.6; earlier versions such as 3.4, 3.3, 3.0, 1.1.1, and 1.0.2 are not vulnerable, and no OpenSSL FIPS modules are impacted.
Any remote TLS 1.3 client can trigger this issue during the handshake by providing only classical groups (e.g., X25519) in its initial keyshares, even if it supports more preferred post-quantum hybrid groups like X25519MLKEM768. Attackers require no privileges and can exploit it over the network with low complexity, leading to negotiation of a less preferred key exchange group. This results in high confidentiality impact (CVSS 3.1 score of 7.5), as the connection may use classical cryptography instead of post-quantum secure options, potentially exposing traffic to future quantum attacks.
The OpenSSL security advisory recommends upgrading OpenSSL 3.6 to version 3.6.2 and OpenSSL 3.5 to version 3.5.6 once released. Patches are available in specific commits on the OpenSSL GitHub repository, and further details are provided in the advisory at openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260313.txt.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-12033
Vulnerability Data
Issue summary: An OpenSSL TLS 1.3 server may fail to negotiate the expected preferred key exchange group when its key exchange group configuration includes the default by using the 'DEFAULT' keyword. Impact summary: A less preferred key exchange may be…
more
used even when a more preferred group is supported by both client and server, if the group was not included among the client's initial predicated keyshares. This will sometimes be the case with the new hybrid post-quantum groups, if the client chooses to defer their use until specifically requested by the server. If an OpenSSL TLS 1.3 server's configuration uses the 'DEFAULT' keyword to interpolate the built-in default group list into its own configuration, perhaps adding or removing specific elements, then an implementation defect causes the 'DEFAULT' list to lose its 'tuple' structure, and all server-supported groups were treated as a single sufficiently secure 'tuple', with the server not sending a Hello Retry Request (HRR) even when a group in a more preferred tuple was mutually supported. As a result, the client and server might fail to negotiate a mutually supported post-quantum key agreement group, such as 'X25519MLKEM768', if the client's configuration results in only 'classical' groups (such as 'X25519' being the only ones in the client's initial keyshare prediction). OpenSSL 3.5 and later support a new syntax for selecting the most preferred TLS 1.3 key agreement group on TLS servers. The old syntax had a single 'flat' list of groups, and treated all the supported groups as sufficiently secure. If any of the keyshares predicted by the client were supported by the server the most preferred among these was selected, even if other groups supported by the client, but not included in the list of predicted keyshares would have been more preferred, if included. The new syntax partitions the groups into distinct 'tuples' of roughly equivalent security. Within each tuple the most preferred group included among the client's predicted keyshares is chosen, but if the client supports a group from a more preferred tuple, but did not predict any corresponding keyshares, the server will ask the client to retry the ClientHello (by issuing a Hello Retry Request or HRR) with the most preferred mutually supported group. The above works as expected when the server's configuration uses the built-in default group list, or explicitly defines its own list by directly defining the various desired groups and group 'tuples'. No OpenSSL FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the code in question lies outside the FIPS boundary. OpenSSL 3.6 and 3.5 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 3.6 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.2 once it is released. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.6 once it is released. OpenSSL 3.4, 3.3, 3.0, 1.0.2 and 1.1.1 are not affected by this issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 7 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
V12.1.1V12.2.1V12.3.3V17.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Specifying and implementing required cryptography types directly precludes negotiation or acceptance of weaker algorithms.
Requiring protection of transmitted confidentiality and integrity forces selection of sufficiently strong negotiated algorithms rather than weaker ones.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.AA-04 addresses protection/verification of identity assertions in SSO/federation contexts while CWE-757 concerns protocol-level crypto algorithm negotiation, so the control neither prevents nor meaningfully mitigates the weakness.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect and block algorithm downgrade vulnerabilities before deployment.
Ensures network services use secure cryptographic parameters, reducing downgrade risk.
Mandates use of strong, approved cryptographic algorithms, directly preventing downgrade to weaker ones.
Secure SDLC practices include selecting strong crypto algorithms during design and implementation.
Application security requirements can specify minimum cryptographic strength to avoid downgrades.
Secure architecture principles include enforcing strong algorithm selection in protocol design.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220938 The LanMan authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only, and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows 11 (1 rule)
- V-253462 The LanMan authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only, and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-225054 The LAN Manager authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
- V-205919 Windows Server 2019 LAN Manager authentication level must be configured to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows Server 2022 (1 rule)
- V-254475 Windows Server 2022 LAN Manager authentication level must be configured to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757