Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-41898 is a high-severity Buffer Over-read (CWE-126) vulnerability in Rust-Openssl Project Rust-Openssl. Its CVSS base score is 8.3 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique OS Credential Dumping (T1003); ranked at the 21th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — 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-2026-41898 is a buffer overflow vulnerability in rust-openssl, a crate providing OpenSSL bindings for the Rust programming language. Affected versions range from 0.9.24 up to but not including 0.10.78. The issue stems from FFI trampolines in SslContextBuilder methods set_psk_client_callback, set_psk_server_callback, set_cookie_generate_cb, and set_stateless_cookie_generate_cb, which forward the user closure's returned usize value directly to OpenSSL without validating it against the provided &mut [u8] buffer. This flaw, mapped to CWE-126 (Buffer Over-read) and CWE-130 (Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency), carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8.
Remote attackers require no privileges, authentication, or user interaction to exploit this over the network with low complexity. By triggering the affected callbacks during TLS handshake processes involving PSK or stateless cookies, adversaries can induce buffer overflows in the underlying OpenSSL library, potentially resulting in high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts such as arbitrary code execution, data corruption, or denial of service.
The vulnerability is addressed in rust-openssl version 0.10.78, where the trampolines now properly validate the returned length against the buffer size. Security practitioners should upgrade to this version or later. Relevant resources include the fixing commit (1d109020d98fff2fb2e45c39a373af3dff99b24c), pull request #2607, release announcement for v0.10.78, and the GitHub security advisory GHSA-hppc-g8h3-xhp3.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25587
Vulnerability Data
rust-openssl provides OpenSSL bindings for the Rust programming language. From 0.9.24 to before 0.10.78, the FFI trampolines behind SslContextBuilder::set_psk_client_callback, set_psk_server_callback, set_cookie_generate_cb, and set_stateless_cookie_generate_cb forwarded the user closure's returned usize directly to OpenSSL without checking it against the &mut [u8] that…
more
was handed to the closure. This can lead to buffer overflows and other unintended consequences. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.10.78.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.5.5V4.2.1V4.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, bounds checking tests) directly finds buffer over-read flaws.
Input validation enforces correct length-to-data consistency checks on parsed messages before processing.
Engineering principles such as memory-safe design and bounds-checked abstractions structurally stop introduction of out-of-bounds reads.
Process isolation limits the blast radius of an over-read to the compromised domain.
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.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover buffer over-read flaws via scanning or review.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software removes known instances of buffer over-read bugs.
Secure development practices directly prevent introduction of buffer over-read weaknesses.
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.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and bounds checking that can prevent buffer over-reads.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and bounds-checking rules.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety and bounds-checking design choices.
Secure coding standards directly require bounds-checked buffer access, mitigating over-reads.
Security testing in development can detect buffer over-reads before release.