CVE-2026-28387 (GCVE-0-2026-28387)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-04-07 22:00
Modified
2026-04-13 13:04
Severity ?
CWE
Summary
Issue summary: An uncommon configuration of clients performing DANE TLSA-based server authentication, when paired with uncommon server DANE TLSA records, may result in a use-after-free and/or double-free on the client side. Impact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences such as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code. However, the issue only affects clients that make use of TLSA records with both the PKIX-TA(0/PKIX-EE(1) certificate usages and the DANE-TA(2) certificate usage. By far the most common deployment of DANE is in SMTP MTAs for which RFC7672 recommends that clients treat as 'unusable' any TLSA records that have the PKIX certificate usages. These SMTP (or other similar) clients are not vulnerable to this issue. Conversely, any clients that support only the PKIX usages, and ignore the DANE-TA(2) usage are also not vulnerable. The client would also need to be communicating with a server that publishes a TLSA RRset with both types of TLSA records. No FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the problem code is outside the FIPS module boundary.
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
OpenSSL OpenSSL Version: 3.6.0   ≤
Version: 3.5.0   ≤
Version: 3.4.0   ≤
Version: 3.3.0   ≤
Version: 3.0.0   ≤
Version: 1.1.1   < 1.1.1zg
 Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-28387",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-04-09T03:56:07.962224Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-04-13T13:04:17.027Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "OpenSSL",
          "vendor": "OpenSSL",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "3.6.2",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.6.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.5.6",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.5.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.4.5",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.4.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.3.7",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.3.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.0.20",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "1.1.1zg",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "1.1.1",
              "versionType": "custom"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Igor Morgenstern (Aisle Research)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Viktor Dukhovni"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Alexandr Nedvedicky"
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2026-04-07T14:00:00.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "Issue summary: An uncommon configuration of clients performing DANE TLSA-based\u003cbr\u003eserver authentication, when paired with uncommon server DANE TLSA records, may\u003cbr\u003eresult in a use-after-free and/or double-free on the client side.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences\u003cbr\u003esuch as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eHowever, the issue only affects clients that make use of TLSA records with both\u003cbr\u003ethe PKIX-TA(0/PKIX-EE(1) certificate usages and the DANE-TA(2) certificate\u003cbr\u003eusage.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eBy far the most common deployment of DANE is in SMTP MTAs for which RFC7672\u003cbr\u003erecommends that clients treat as \u0027unusable\u0027 any TLSA records that have the PKIX\u003cbr\u003ecertificate usages.  These SMTP (or other similar) clients are not vulnerable\u003cbr\u003eto this issue.  Conversely, any clients that support only the PKIX usages, and\u003cbr\u003eignore the DANE-TA(2) usage are also not vulnerable.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe client would also need to be communicating with a server that publishes a\u003cbr\u003eTLSA RRset with both types of TLSA records.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the problem code is outside the\u003cbr\u003eFIPS module boundary."
            }
          ],
          "value": "Issue summary: An uncommon configuration of clients performing DANE TLSA-based\nserver authentication, when paired with uncommon server DANE TLSA records, may\nresult in a use-after-free and/or double-free on the client side.\n\nImpact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences\nsuch as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code.\n\nHowever, the issue only affects clients that make use of TLSA records with both\nthe PKIX-TA(0/PKIX-EE(1) certificate usages and the DANE-TA(2) certificate\nusage.\n\nBy far the most common deployment of DANE is in SMTP MTAs for which RFC7672\nrecommends that clients treat as \u0027unusable\u0027 any TLSA records that have the PKIX\ncertificate usages.  These SMTP (or other similar) clients are not vulnerable\nto this issue.  Conversely, any clients that support only the PKIX usages, and\nignore the DANE-TA(2) usage are also not vulnerable.\n\nThe client would also need to be communicating with a server that publishes a\nTLSA RRset with both types of TLSA records.\n\nNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the problem code is outside the\nFIPS module boundary."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "format": "other",
          "other": {
            "content": {
              "text": "Low"
            },
            "type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-416",
              "description": "CWE-416 Use After Free",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-04-07T22:00:51.496Z",
        "orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
        "shortName": "openssl"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260407.txt"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.6.2 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/258a8f63b26995ba357f4326da00e19e29c6acbe"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.5.6 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/444958deaf450aea819171f97ae69eaedede42c3"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.4.5 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/07e727d304746edb49a98ee8f6ab00256e1f012b"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.3.7 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7a4e08cee62a728d32e60b0de89e6764339df0a7"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.0.20 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ec03fa050b3346997ed9c5fef3d0e16ad7db8177"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Potential Use-after-free in DANE Client Code",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
    "assignerShortName": "openssl",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-28387",
    "datePublished": "2026-04-07T22:00:51.496Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-02-27T13:45:02.161Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-04-13T13:04:17.027Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-28387\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"total\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-04-09T03:56:07.962224Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-04-13T13:00:32.514Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"Potential Use-after-free in DANE Client Code\", \"source\": {\"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"credits\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"reporter\", \"value\": \"Igor Morgenstern (Aisle Research)\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"remediation developer\", \"value\": \"Viktor Dukhovni\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"remediation developer\", \"value\": \"Alexandr Nedvedicky\"}], \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/\", \"content\": {\"text\": \"Low\"}}, \"format\": \"other\"}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"OpenSSL\", \"product\": \"OpenSSL\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.6.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.6.2\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.5.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.5.6\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.4.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.4.5\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.3.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.3.7\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.0.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.0.20\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"1.1.1\", \"lessThan\": \"1.1.1zg\", \"versionType\": \"custom\"}], \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\"}], \"datePublic\": \"2026-04-07T14:00:00.000Z\", \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260407.txt\", \"name\": \"OpenSSL Advisory\", \"tags\": [\"vendor-advisory\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/258a8f63b26995ba357f4326da00e19e29c6acbe\", \"name\": \"3.6.2 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/444958deaf450aea819171f97ae69eaedede42c3\", \"name\": \"3.5.6 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/07e727d304746edb49a98ee8f6ab00256e1f012b\", \"name\": \"3.4.5 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7a4e08cee62a728d32e60b0de89e6764339df0a7\", \"name\": \"3.3.7 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ec03fa050b3346997ed9c5fef3d0e16ad7db8177\", \"name\": \"3.0.20 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}], \"x_generator\": {\"engine\": \"Vulnogram 0.2.0\"}, \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"Issue summary: An uncommon configuration of clients performing DANE TLSA-based\\nserver authentication, when paired with uncommon server DANE TLSA records, may\\nresult in a use-after-free and/or double-free on the client side.\\n\\nImpact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences\\nsuch as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code.\\n\\nHowever, the issue only affects clients that make use of TLSA records with both\\nthe PKIX-TA(0/PKIX-EE(1) certificate usages and the DANE-TA(2) certificate\\nusage.\\n\\nBy far the most common deployment of DANE is in SMTP MTAs for which RFC7672\\nrecommends that clients treat as \u0027unusable\u0027 any TLSA records that have the PKIX\\ncertificate usages.  These SMTP (or other similar) clients are not vulnerable\\nto this issue.  Conversely, any clients that support only the PKIX usages, and\\nignore the DANE-TA(2) usage are also not vulnerable.\\n\\nThe client would also need to be communicating with a server that publishes a\\nTLSA RRset with both types of TLSA records.\\n\\nNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the problem code is outside the\\nFIPS module boundary.\", \"supportingMedia\": [{\"type\": \"text/html\", \"value\": \"Issue summary: An uncommon configuration of clients performing DANE TLSA-based\u003cbr\u003eserver authentication, when paired with uncommon server DANE TLSA records, may\u003cbr\u003eresult in a use-after-free and/or double-free on the client side.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences\u003cbr\u003esuch as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eHowever, the issue only affects clients that make use of TLSA records with both\u003cbr\u003ethe PKIX-TA(0/PKIX-EE(1) certificate usages and the DANE-TA(2) certificate\u003cbr\u003eusage.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eBy far the most common deployment of DANE is in SMTP MTAs for which RFC7672\u003cbr\u003erecommends that clients treat as \u0027unusable\u0027 any TLSA records that have the PKIX\u003cbr\u003ecertificate usages.  These SMTP (or other similar) clients are not vulnerable\u003cbr\u003eto this issue.  Conversely, any clients that support only the PKIX usages, and\u003cbr\u003eignore the DANE-TA(2) usage are also not vulnerable.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe client would also need to be communicating with a server that publishes a\u003cbr\u003eTLSA RRset with both types of TLSA records.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eNo FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the problem code is outside the\u003cbr\u003eFIPS module boundary.\", \"base64\": false}]}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-416\", \"description\": \"CWE-416 Use After Free\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5\", \"shortName\": \"openssl\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-04-07T22:00:51.496Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-28387\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-04-13T13:04:17.027Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-02-27T13:45:02.161Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-04-07T22:00:51.496Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"openssl\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.2"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.