Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-45445

Openssl 3.0.0 – 3.0.21

Published
09 June 2026
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0060 46th percentile
Risk Priority 58 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-45445 is a high-severity Missing Cryptographic Step (CWE-325) vulnerability in Openssl Openssl. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Weaken Encryption (T1600); ranked at the 46th 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 SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) — 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.

The vulnerability is a cryptographic flaw in OpenSSL's AES-OCB implementation when an application invokes the cipher through the public EVP_Cipher() one-shot interface. In this code path the caller-supplied initialization vector is ignored, so every encryption under the same key reuses the all-zero offset state left after cipher initialization. The resulting (key, nonce) reuse breaks confidentiality; when the same path is later used to generate an authentication tag via EVP_EncryptFinal_ex, the tag becomes a deterministic function of only the key and IV, enabling universal forgery of arbitrary ciphertexts from a single captured message. Only applications that combine AES-OCB with the one-shot EVP_Cipher() API are affected; the TLS stack, the streaming EVP_CipherUpdate/EVP_CipherFinal_ex interface, and all FIPS module boundaries are explicitly out of scope.

An unauthenticated remote attacker who can observe or capture traffic encrypted by a vulnerable application can decrypt subsequent messages encrypted under the same key because the effective nonce never changes. If the application also derives authentication tags through the same code path, the attacker can forge valid tags for arbitrary ciphertexts without knowledge of the key, achieving both confidentiality loss and integrity violation.

The referenced commits restore correct IV handling inside the one-shot handler for AES-OCB and confirm that applications must migrate to the documented streaming AEAD interface to avoid the defect. No other configuration changes or work-arounds are described.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Issue summary: When an application drives an AES-OCB context through the public EVP_Cipher() one-shot interface, the application-supplied initialisation vector (IV) is silently discarded. Impact summary: Every message encrypted under the same key uses the same effective nonce regardless of the…

more

IV supplied by the caller, resulting in (key, nonce) reuse and loss of confidentiality. If the same code path is used to compute the authentication tag, the tag depends only on the (key, IV) pair and not on the plaintext or ciphertext, allowing universal forgery of arbitrary ciphertext from a single captured message. OpenSSL provides two ways to drive a cipher: the documented streaming interface (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) and a lower-level one-shot, EVP_Cipher(), whose documentation explicitly recommends against use by applications in favour of EVP_CipherUpdate() and EVP_CipherFinal_ex(). The OCB provider's streaming handler flushes the application-supplied IV into the OCB context before processing data; the one-shot handler did not. Every call to EVP_Cipher() on an AES-OCB context therefore ran with the all-zero key-derived offset state left by cipher initialisation, regardless of the caller's IV. If EVP_EncryptFinal_ex() is subsequently used to obtain the authentication tag, the deferred IV setup runs at that point and clears the running checksum that should have been accumulated over the plaintext. The resulting tag is a function of (key, IV) only and verifies against any ciphertext produced under the same (key, IV) pair. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected: AES-OCB is not a TLS cipher suite, and libssl does not call EVP_Cipher() in any case. Applications that drive AES-OCB through the documented streaming AEAD API (EVP_CipherUpdate / EVP_CipherFinal_ex) are not affected. Only applications that combine the AES-OCB cipher with the EVP_Cipher() one-shot API are vulnerable. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as AES-OCB is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1600 Weaken Encryption Defense Impairment
Adversaries may compromise a network device’s encryption capability in order to bypass encryption that would otherwise protect data communications.
T1600.001 Reduce Key Space Defense Impairment
Adversaries may reduce the level of effort required to decrypt data transmitted over the network by reducing the cipher strength of encrypted communications.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-42770Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2025-69418Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2026-45446Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2026-9076Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2026-28387Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2024-0727Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2026-34182Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2025-69420Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2026-31789Same product: Openssl Openssl
CVE-2026-31790Same product: Openssl Openssl

Affected Assets

openssl
openssl
4.0.0 · 3.0.0 — 3.0.21 · 3.4.0 — 3.4.6 · 3.5.0 — 3.5.7

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 14 hardening rules · 6 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Requires selection and implementation of specific approved cryptographic algorithms and methods, reducing the chance that an incomplete algorithm is used.

Mandates developer testing and evaluation that can uncover missing cryptographic steps through functional and penetration testing.

Requires documented development standards and processes that include correct cryptographic algorithm implementation.

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.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices explicitly include correct cryptographic algorithm implementation and testing.

PR.DS-01 partial match
prevents

Proper encryption of data-at-rest requires all algorithm steps; omitting one directly weakens the control.

PR.DS-02 partial match
prevents

Proper encryption of data-in-transit requires all algorithm steps; omitting one directly weakens the control.

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.

finds

Security testing can detect incomplete crypto implementations but does not itself enforce correct algorithm steps.

degrades

Mandates correct use of cryptographic controls, directly preventing omission of required algorithm steps.

prevents

Secure SDLC processes reduce the likelihood of missing crypto steps but do not guarantee algorithm completeness.

prevents

Requires secure coding practices that would catch missing cryptographic steps during development.

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).

Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
  • V-248524 OL 8 must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect data requiring data-at-rest protections in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-325
  • V-248535 The OL 8 shadow password suite must be configured to use a sufficient number of hashing rounds. prevents CWE-325
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271454 OL 9 must enable FIPS mode. prevents CWE-325
RHEL 7 (1 rule)
  • V-204497 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography for the following: to provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect data requiring data-at-rest protections in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-325
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
  • V-230223 RHEL 8 must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect data requiring data-at-rest protections in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-325
Ubuntu 22.04 (1 rule)
  • V-260650 Ubuntu 22.04 LTS must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography to protect classified information and for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect unclassified information requiring confidentiality and cryptographic protection in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-325
Ubuntu 24.04 (1 rule)
  • V-270744 Ubuntu 24.04 LTS must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography to protect classified information and for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect unclassified information requiring confidentiality and cryptographic protection in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-325

References