CVE-2026-35191 (GCVE-0-2026-35191)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-09-29 15:32
Modified
2026-09-30 20:11
Severity ?
CWE
  • CWE-440 - Expected Behavior Violation
Summary
Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address validation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its unvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000 unvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data received. Impact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the OpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of a DDoS attack. CWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation Description: OpenSSL's QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client address validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not used for a traffic amplification attack. If this feature is disabled on the server, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3 times the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the TLS handshake is completed. The OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the length of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when processing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may, after establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a subsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to account the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting in the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has, thereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC. FIPS impact: no As the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
OpenSSL OpenSSL Version: 4.0.0   ≤
Version: 3.6.0   ≤
Version: 3.5.0   ≤
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "cvssV3_1": {
              "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
              "attackVector": "NETWORK",
              "availabilityImpact": "LOW",
              "baseScore": 3.7,
              "baseSeverity": "LOW",
              "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
              "integrityImpact": "NONE",
              "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
              "scope": "UNCHANGED",
              "userInteraction": "NONE",
              "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
              "version": "3.1"
            }
          },
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-35191",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-30T19:35:19.683843Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T20:11:09.437Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "OpenSSL",
          "vendor": "OpenSSL",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "4.0.3",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "4.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.6.5",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.6.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.5.9",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.5.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Ali Firas"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Nikolas Gauder (NVIDIA)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Neil Horman"
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2026-09-29T14:21:57.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address\u003cbr\u003evalidation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its\u003cbr\u003eunvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000\u003cbr\u003eunvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data\u003cbr\u003ereceived.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the\u003cbr\u003eOpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of\u003cbr\u003ea DDoS attack.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eCWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation \u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eDescription: OpenSSL\u0027s QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client\u003cbr\u003eaddress validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not\u003cbr\u003eused for a traffic amplification attack.  If this feature is disabled on the\u003cbr\u003eserver, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3\u003cbr\u003etimes the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the\u003cbr\u003eTLS handshake is completed.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the\u003cbr\u003elength of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when\u003cbr\u003eprocessing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may,\u003cbr\u003eafter establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a\u003cbr\u003esubsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to\u003cbr\u003eaccount the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting\u003cbr\u003ein the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has,\u003cbr\u003ethereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eFIPS impact: no\u003cbr\u003eAs the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules\u003cbr\u003eare affected by this CVE."
            }
          ],
          "value": "Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address\nvalidation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its\nunvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000\nunvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data\nreceived.\n\nImpact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the\nOpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of\na DDoS attack.\n\nCWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation \n\nDescription: OpenSSL\u0027s QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client\naddress validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not\nused for a traffic amplification attack.  If this feature is disabled on the\nserver, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3\ntimes the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the\nTLS handshake is completed.\n\nThe OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the\nlength of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when\nprocessing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may,\nafter establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a\nsubsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to\naccount the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting\nin the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has,\nthereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC.\n\nFIPS impact: no\nAs the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules\nare affected by this CVE."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "format": "other",
          "other": {
            "content": {
              "text": "Low"
            },
            "type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-440",
              "description": "CWE-440 Expected Behavior Violation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T15:32:12.944Z",
        "orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
        "shortName": "openssl"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260929.txt"
        },
        {
          "name": "4.0.3 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/e44292e58b090014232ef75bd400393851b24d1a"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.6.5 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/2de4c35fb13fc58f43fd8dc1d261700472ce72e5"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.5.9 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/0fe4442d4f8ea3af8a174046dae176e0d4717239"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "QUIC Unvalidated Amplification Credit may be Over Accounted",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
    "assignerShortName": "openssl",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-35191",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-29T15:32:12.944Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-04-01T17:36:26.324Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T20:11:09.437Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"cna\": {\"title\": \"QUIC Unvalidated Amplification Credit may be Over Accounted\", \"source\": {\"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"credits\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"reporter\", \"value\": \"Ali Firas\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"reporter\", \"value\": \"Nikolas Gauder (NVIDIA)\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"remediation developer\", \"value\": \"Neil Horman\"}], \"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\": \"4.0.0\", \"lessThan\": \"4.0.3\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.6.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.6.5\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"3.5.0\", \"lessThan\": \"3.5.9\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}], \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\"}], \"datePublic\": \"2026-09-29T14:21:57.000Z\", \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260929.txt\", \"name\": \"OpenSSL Advisory\", \"tags\": [\"vendor-advisory\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/e44292e58b090014232ef75bd400393851b24d1a\", \"name\": \"4.0.3 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/2de4c35fb13fc58f43fd8dc1d261700472ce72e5\", \"name\": \"3.6.5 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/0fe4442d4f8ea3af8a174046dae176e0d4717239\", \"name\": \"3.5.9 git commit\", \"tags\": [\"patch\"]}], \"x_generator\": {\"engine\": \"Vulnogram 0.2.0\"}, \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address\\nvalidation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its\\nunvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000\\nunvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data\\nreceived.\\n\\nImpact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the\\nOpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of\\na DDoS attack.\\n\\nCWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation \\n\\nDescription: OpenSSL\u0027s QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client\\naddress validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not\\nused for a traffic amplification attack.  If this feature is disabled on the\\nserver, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3\\ntimes the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the\\nTLS handshake is completed.\\n\\nThe OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the\\nlength of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when\\nprocessing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may,\\nafter establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a\\nsubsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to\\naccount the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting\\nin the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has,\\nthereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC.\\n\\nFIPS impact: no\\nAs the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules\\nare affected by this CVE.\", \"supportingMedia\": [{\"type\": \"text/html\", \"value\": \"Issue summary: The OpenSSL QUIC server, when configured to not preform address\u003cbr\u003evalidation, can be forced to count incoming packets multiple times in its\u003cbr\u003eunvalidated credit computation, leading to a violation of the RFC 9000\u003cbr\u003eunvalidated connection amplification limit of 3 times the amount of data\u003cbr\u003ereceived.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: A remote attacker able to spoof packets to a server using the\u003cbr\u003eOpenSSL QUIC implementation might use the server for an amplification of\u003cbr\u003ea DDoS attack.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eCWE: CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation \u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eDescription: OpenSSL\u0027s QUIC stack, when operating as a server, enforces client\u003cbr\u003eaddress validation (RFC 9000, Section 8), to confirm the peer address is not\u003cbr\u003eused for a traffic amplification attack.  If this feature is disabled on the\u003cbr\u003eserver, the QUIC stack limits the amount of server data that can be sent to 3\u003cbr\u003etimes the amount of data received from the peer address, until such time as the\u003cbr\u003eTLS handshake is completed.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe OpenSSL QUIC server, when operating in non-validation mode, adds the\u003cbr\u003elength of the whole datagram received to the unvalidated credit limit when\u003cbr\u003eprocessing each QUIC packet in the datagram. A remote peer may,\u003cbr\u003eafter establishing a connection with an initial client hello frame, send a\u003cbr\u003esubsequent datagram containing multiple QUIC packets, leading the server to\u003cbr\u003eaccount the entire datagram length for each packet in the datagram, resulting\u003cbr\u003ein the server believing that the peer has sent more data than it actually has,\u003cbr\u003ethereby violating the 3x amplification limit mandated by the RFC.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eFIPS impact: no\u003cbr\u003eAs the QUIC stack lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules\u003cbr\u003eare affected by this CVE.\", \"base64\": false}]}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-440\", \"description\": \"CWE-440 Expected Behavior Violation\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5\", \"shortName\": \"openssl\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-09-29T15:32:12.944Z\"}}, \"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 3.7, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"LOW\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L\", \"integrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"HIGH\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"LOW\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"NONE\"}}, {\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-35191\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-09-30T19:35:19.683843Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-09-30T19:35:15.313Z\"}}]}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-35191\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-09-29T15:32:12.944Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-04-01T17:36:26.324Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-09-29T15:32:12.944Z\", \"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.