<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2026 05:03:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-63075 — QUIC ACK-only Packet Retention Can Cause Memory Exhaustion</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2026-63075</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; OpenSSL&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Issue summary: When OpenSSL processes QUIC traffic from a peer that repeatedly
sends ack-eliciting packets while not acknowledging ACK-only responses, the
QUIC stack can retain ACK-only packet metadata for the lifetime of the
connection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Impact summary: A remote peer that can complete a QUIC handshake can
cause connection-scoped memory growth which may lead to Denial of Service
through memory exhaustion, especially with sustained traffic or many concurrent
QUIC connections.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Description: When the OpenSSL QUIC stack sends an ACK-only packet,
there is no requirement by the QUIC protocol that the peer will acknowledge
that ACK-only packet (i.e. it is itself not ack-eliciting). However, the OpenSSL
implementation stores the metadata about the ACK frames regardless.
In and of itself that&amp;#39;s ok, but if a malicious peer establishes a connection, and
then drives the connection such that ACK-only packets are forced from the 
OpenSSL implementation peer (i.e., by sending numerous PING frames),
and then withholding any subsequent acks for ack-eliciting data, like
legitimate data, said malicious peer can force inappropriate memory growth
on the OpenSSL peer, potentially leading to a Denial of Service.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The fix is to ensure that we account for the transmission of the ACK-only
packet in the packet histories high and low watermark without actually storing
the ACK-only packet metadata itself.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;FIPS impact: no
The OpenSSL FI…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; OpenSSL&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Issue summary: When OpenSSL processes QUIC traffic from a peer that repeatedly
sends ack-eliciting packets while not acknowledging ACK-only responses, the
QUIC stack can retain ACK-only packet metadata for the lifetime of the
connection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Impact summary: A remote peer that can complete a QUIC handshake can
cause connection-scoped memory growth which may lead to Denial of Service
through memory exhaustion, especially with sustained traffic or many concurrent
QUIC connections.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Description: When the OpenSSL QUIC stack sends an ACK-only packet,
there is no requirement by the QUIC protocol that the peer will acknowledge
that ACK-only packet (i.e. it is itself not ack-eliciting). However, the OpenSSL
implementation stores the metadata about the ACK frames regardless.
In and of itself that&amp;#39;s ok, but if a malicious peer establishes a connection, and
then drives the connection such that ACK-only packets are forced from the 
OpenSSL implementation peer (i.e., by sending numerous PING frames),
and then withholding any subsequent acks for ack-eliciting data, like
legitimate data, said malicious peer can force inappropriate memory growth
on the OpenSSL peer, potentially leading to a Denial of Service.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The fix is to ensure that we account for the transmission of the ACK-only
packet in the packet histories high and low watermark without actually storing
the ACK-only packet metadata itself.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;FIPS impact: no
The OpenSSL FI…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2026-63075</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>USN-8678-1 — openssl vulnerabilities</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/usn-8678-1</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:22.04:LTS: openssl, Ubuntu:24.04:LTS: openssl, Ubuntu:26.04:LTS: openssl&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled the QUIC server incoming
channel queue. A remote attacker could possibly use this issue to cause
OpenSSL to use excessive resources, leading to a denial of service. This
issue only affected Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-14456)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled signature algorithm
selection when using Raw Public Keys. A remote attacker could possibly use
this issue to cause OpenSSL to crash, resulting in a denial of service.
This issue only affected Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-14457)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled QUIC INITIAL packet
processing. A remote attacker could possibly use this issue to cause
OpenSSL to crash, resulting in a denial of service. This issue only
affected Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-18798)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled buffering of DTLS
records for a future epoch. A remote attacker could possibly use this issue
to cause OpenSSL to use excessive resources, leading to a denial of
service. (CVE-2026-54874)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled CMS key unwrapping. A
remote attacker could possibly use this issue to cause a heap buffer
overflow, leading to a denial of service or arbitrary code execution.
(CVE-2026-63072)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly validated the sender
distinguished name in CMP response messages. A remote attacker could
possibly use this issue to cause OpenSSL to crash, resulting in a denial of
service. Th…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:22.04:LTS: openssl, Ubuntu:24.04:LTS: openssl, Ubuntu:26.04:LTS: openssl&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled the QUIC server incoming
channel queue. A remote attacker could possibly use this issue to cause
OpenSSL to use excessive resources, leading to a denial of service. This
issue only affected Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-14456)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled signature algorithm
selection when using Raw Public Keys. A remote attacker could possibly use
this issue to cause OpenSSL to crash, resulting in a denial of service.
This issue only affected Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-14457)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled QUIC INITIAL packet
processing. A remote attacker could possibly use this issue to cause
OpenSSL to crash, resulting in a denial of service. This issue only
affected Ubuntu 26.04 LTS. (CVE-2026-18798)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled buffering of DTLS
records for a future epoch. A remote attacker could possibly use this issue
to cause OpenSSL to use excessive resources, leading to a denial of
service. (CVE-2026-54874)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly handled CMS key unwrapping. A
remote attacker could possibly use this issue to cause a heap buffer
overflow, leading to a denial of service or arbitrary code execution.
(CVE-2026-63072)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It was discovered that OpenSSL incorrectly validated the sender
distinguished name in CMP response messages. A remote attacker could
possibly use this issue to cause OpenSSL to crash, resulting in a denial of
service. Th…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/usn-8678-1</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
