| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A vulnerability was identified in sfturing hosp_order up to 627f426331da8086ce8fff2017d65b1ddef384f8. The affected element is the function MD5.getMD5 of the file ssm_pro/src/main/java/cn/sfturing/utils/MD5.java of the component User Password Handler. The manipulation leads to one-way hash without salt. The attack may be initiated remotely. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitability is described as difficult. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. This product uses a rolling release model to deliver continuous updates. As a result, specific version information for affected or updated releases is not available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet. |
| Dell Wyse Management Suite, versions prior to 2605.0.3.683, contain a Missing Cryptographic Step vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information tampering. |
| EAZ EazyFix 12.9 allows a Security Feature Bypass related to a "Missing Cryptographic Step" associated with "Secure Boot disable." |
| Missing critical step in authentication in Apache HttpClient 5.6 allows an attacker to cause the client to accept SCRAM-SHA-256 authentication without proper mutual authentication verification. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 5.6.1, which fixes this issue. |
| Multiple
TP-Link Kasa smart home devices contain insufficient cryptographic protections
in the local device communication protocol. An adjacent network attacker may
intercept, replay or forge locally exchanged control messages, potentially
resulting in unauthorized device control.
Successful
exploitation could allow an attacker to manipulate the operational state of an
affected device, resulting in unauthorized state changes, disruption of normal
device functionality or a denial-of-service condition. |
| A vulnerability in an IPsec VPN library of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software and Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to read or modify data within an IPsec IKEv2 VPN tunnel. This vulnerability is due to an improper implementation of Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) ciphers. An attacker in a man-in-the-middle position could exploit this vulnerability by intercepting a sufficient number of encrypted messages across an affected IPsec IKEv2 VPN tunnel and then using cryptanalytic techniques to break the encryption. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to decrypt, read, modify, and re-encrypt data that is transmitted across an affected IPsec IKEv2 VPN tunnel. |
| Missing cryptographic step in Windows Boot Loader allows an authorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally. |
| Missing Cryptographic Step (CWE-325) vulnerability exists in certain FeliCa IC chips shipped in or before 2017. If the vulnerability is exploited, information stored in the IC chip may be read or tampered with. |
| Cryptographic Flaw in Enterprise in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed an attacker in a privileged network position to bypass discretionary access control via malicious network traffic. (Chromium security severity: High) |
| Versions of the package sjcl before 1.0.9 are vulnerable to Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature due to missing point-on-curve validation in sjcl.ecc.basicKey.publicKey(). An attacker can recover a victim's ECDH private key by sending crafted off-curve public keys and observing ECDH outputs. The dhJavaEc() function directly returns the raw x-coordinate of the scalar multiplication result (no hashing), providing a plaintext oracle without requiring any decryption feedback. |
| Issue summary: When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42)
peer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership.
Impact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying the
victim's p and g parameters, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the
cofactor (p−1)/q_local), and a public value Y of order r can recover the
victim's private key after a small number of key exchange attempts.
When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the
subgroup membership check Y^q ≡ 1 (mod p) is performed using the peer's
own q parameter, not the local key's q. The peer's domain parameters are
then matched against the domain parameters of the private key, but the value
of q is not compared.
A malicious peer who presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim's p, g,
a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor), and a public
value Y of order r passes all checks. The shared secret then takes only
r distinct values, leaking priv mod r. Repeating for each small-prime
factor of the cofactor and combining via CRT recovers the full private
key (Lim–Lee / small-subgroup-confinement attack).
The realistic attack surface is narrow: principally CMP deployments with
long-lived RA/CA DHX keys and bespoke enterprise or government applications
using X9.42 DHX static keys with interactive protocols and therefore this
issue was assigned Low severity.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.1.2 and 3.0 are affected by this
issue. |
| Versions of the package jsrsasign before 11.1.1 are vulnerable to Missing Cryptographic Step via the KJUR.crypto.DSA.signWithMessageHash process in the DSA signing implementation. An attacker can recover the private key by forcing r or s to be zero, so the library emits an invalid signature without retrying, and then solves for x from the resulting signature. |
| Missing cryptographic step in Windows CryptoAPI allows an authorized attacker to perform tampering locally. |
| Deno is a JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly runtime. Prior to 2.8.1, node:crypto.checkPrime(candidate[, options][, callback]) and crypto.checkPrimeSync(candidate[, options]) ran no Miller-Rabin rounds at all when the caller left options.checks at its default of 0. In that mode, the only test applied to the candidate was trial division by the primes up to 17,863. Any composite whose smallest prime factor exceeds that bound — for example the product of two primes just above it, such as 17,881 × 17,891 — was reported as true ("probably prime"). The same divergence affected the lower-level op_node_check_prime / op_node_check_prime_bytes paths that the polyfill calls into. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.8.1. |
| Missing cryptographic step in Caliptra Core Firmware (aes_256_gcm_update module) results in an incorrect GCM authentication tag. When the streaming AES-256-GCM API is used with empty AAD, the hardware GHASH accumulator state is not saved after the first update call, causing the final tag to exclude the first batch of processed ciphertext. Ciphertext produced by that call may be modified without the tag reflecting the change.
This issue affects Core Runtime Firmware: from 2.0.0 through 2.0.1, 2.1.0. |
| 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 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. |
| Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV
(RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated
Data) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages.
Impact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD
to the victim's application using these ciphers.
AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD
modes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated
but not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte
tag. On decrypt, `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` is documented to return success only
if the tag is verified succesfully.
In OpenSSL's provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is
computed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data.
If the caller supplies AAD and then calls `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` without
invocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received
ciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its
all-zeros value.
When AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty
ciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not
know, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it's
necessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without
resetting the key.
AES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since
OpenSSL 3.2.
No protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support
either AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must
implement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the
ciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives.
The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this
issue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is
outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. |
| A Missing Required Cryptographic Step vulnerability has been identified in Moxa's embedded Linux firmware for industrial computers and controllers. This vulnerability represents an incomplete remediation of CVE-2026-0714. The firmware introduced TPM2 parameter encryption as a countermeasure against CVE-2026-0714. However, an omission in the authorization session configuration causes the parameter encryption to provide no effective protection. An attacker with invasive physical access to the device can still capture TPM communications on the SPI bus and derive the LUKS disk encryption key in plaintext. While successful exploitation results in full compromise of the encrypted disk volume, the attack requires invasive physical access, including opening the device and attaching external equipment to the SPI bus. Remote exploitation is not possible, and the attack does not affect any downstream systems. |
| An improper implementation of TLS certificate validation vulnerability found in NETGEAR's ReadyCloud client app which could allow an attacker to perform attacker-in-the-middle (MiTM) style attacks impacting the product's confidentiality. This vulnerability affects the listed NETGEAR models. |
| Windows Kerberos Information Disclosure Vulnerability |
