Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-42767 is a medium-severity NULL Pointer Dereference (CWE-476) vulnerability in Openssl Openssl. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 44th 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — 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-2026-42767 is a NULL pointer dereference vulnerability in OpenSSL's Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) client implementation. When a CMP client processes a Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF) CertRepMessage containing an EncryptedValue structure whose symmAlg field supplies an algorithm OID without a parameters field, the client dereferences a NULL pointer and crashes. The flaw affects any application that processes untrusted CMP or CRMF messages; the FIPS modules in OpenSSL 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are explicitly outside the affected code path.
An attacker who controls a CMP server or who can perform a man-in-the-middle attack can send a crafted CMP response that triggers the crash, resulting in a denial-of-service condition for the client. The vulnerability carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 5.9 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) and is classified under CWE-476.
The referenced OpenSSL commits (61a86a8, 665d525, 810b722, b90ff3b, and e6f9129) contain the corrective changes that prevent the NULL dereference when handling the malformed EncryptedValue structure. No other mitigation guidance is supplied in the available references. The current EPSS score of 0.0006 indicates low exploitation probability with no material upward trajectory reported.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-35484
Vulnerability Data
Issue summary: An attacker-controlled CMP (Certificate Management Protocol) server could trigger a NULL pointer dereference in a CMP client application. Impact summary: A NULL pointer dereference causes a crash of the application and a Denial of Service. An attacker controlling…
more
a CMP server (or acting as a man-in-the-middle) could craft a CMP response containing a CRMF (Certificate Request Message Format) CertRepMessage with an EncryptedValue structure where the symmAlg field has an algorithm OID but no parameters field. When the OpenSSL CMP client processes this response, the NULL dereference occurs, causing a crash of the CMP client. Applications that process untrusted CMP/CRMF messages may be affected. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including static analysis) directly finds null-dereference bugs before deployment.
Documented development standards and tools can enforce null-safety rules and safe pointer usage.
Engineering principles can mandate defensive coding such as explicit null checks before dereference.
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.
Secure SDLC practices (static analysis, code review, safe coding standards) directly prevent NULL dereference bugs during development.
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 NULL dereference defects before release.
Secure SDLC mandates defensive coding practices that can prevent NULL dereferences.
Application security requirements can specify input validation and pointer-safety rules.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design that avoids unsafe pointer use.
Secure coding standards directly require NULL-pointer checks and safe dereference patterns.