CVE-2026-34872 (GCVE-0-2026-34872)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-04-01 00:00
Modified
2026-04-01 19:52
Severity ?
VLAI Severity ?
EPSS score ?
CWE
- n/a
Summary
An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.5.x and 3.6.x through 3.6.5 and TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0. There is a lack of contributory behavior in FFDH due to improper input validation. Using finite-field Diffie-Hellman, the other party can force the shared secret into a small set of values (lack of contributory behavior). This is a problem for protocols that depend on contributory behavior (which is not the case for TLS). The attack can be carried by the peer, or depending on the protocol by an active network attacker (person in the middle).
References
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 9.1,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-34872",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-04-01T19:51:10.004400Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-347",
"description": "CWE-347 Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-01T19:52:25.548Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "n/a",
"vendor": "n/a",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "n/a"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.5.x and 3.6.x through 3.6.5 and TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0. There is a lack of contributory behavior in FFDH due to improper input validation. Using finite-field Diffie-Hellman, the other party can force the shared secret into a small set of values (lack of contributory behavior). This is a problem for protocols that depend on contributory behavior (which is not the case for TLS). The attack can be carried by the peer, or depending on the protocol by an active network attacker (person in the middle)."
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"description": "n/a",
"lang": "en",
"type": "text"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-01T19:09:15.681Z",
"orgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
"shortName": "mitre"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/security-advisories/"
},
{
"url": "https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/security-advisories/mbedtls-security-advisory-2026-03-ffdh-peerkey-checks/"
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
"assignerShortName": "mitre",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-34872",
"datePublished": "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-31T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-01T19:52:25.548Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 9.1, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"CRITICAL\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N\", \"integrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}}, {\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-34872\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"yes\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-04-01T19:51:10.004400Z\"}}}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-347\", \"description\": \"CWE-347 Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-04-01T19:50:04.483Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"n/a\", \"product\": \"n/a\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"n/a\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/security-advisories/\"}, {\"url\": \"https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/security-advisories/mbedtls-security-advisory-2026-03-ffdh-peerkey-checks/\"}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.5.x and 3.6.x through 3.6.5 and TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0. There is a lack of contributory behavior in FFDH due to improper input validation. Using finite-field Diffie-Hellman, the other party can force the shared secret into a small set of values (lack of contributory behavior). This is a problem for protocols that depend on contributory behavior (which is not the case for TLS). The attack can be carried by the peer, or depending on the protocol by an active network attacker (person in the middle).\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"text\", \"description\": \"n/a\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca\", \"shortName\": \"mitre\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-04-01T19:09:15.681Z\"}}}",
"cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-34872\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-04-01T19:52:25.548Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-03-31T00:00:00.000Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"mitre\"}",
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
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.
Loading…
Loading…