HighCVE-2026-54874

    Excessive Memory Use Buffering DTLS Records for a Future Epoch (CVE-2026-54874)

    Published Last modified Sources: Red Hat, Ubuntu, SUSE, Debian, BSI, CVE.org, Msrc Update Guide

    What is affected, what to do

    A flaw was found in OpenSSL. Receiving a DTLS (Datagram Transport Layer Security) record for a future epoch while a handshake is in progress causes OpenSSL to buffer an excessive amount of memory.

    Update OpenSSL to version 4.0.2, OpenSSL to version 3.6.4, OpenSSL to version 3.5.8.

    Affected
    • OpenSSL lt 4.0.0..4.0.2
    • OpenSSL lt 3.6.0..3.6.4
    • OpenSSL lt 3.5.0..3.5.8
    • OpenSSL lt 3.4.0..3.4.7
    • OpenSSL lt 3.0.0..3.0.22
    • OpenSSL lt 1.1.1..1.1.1zi
    • OpenSSL lt 1.0.2..1.0.2zr
    Fixed in
    • OpenSSL 4.0.2
    • OpenSSL 3.6.4
    • OpenSSL 3.5.8
    • OpenSSL 3.4.7
    • OpenSSL 3.0.22
    • OpenSSL 1.1.1zi
    • OpenSSL 1.0.2zr

    Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability

    Metrics

    7.5

    Priority

    XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.

    Source: Vendor (CNA), CVSS v3

    7.5

    CVSS v3

    Severity High on the scale from 0 to 10.

    Source: Red Hat, Ubuntu, SUSE, Debian, BSI, CVE.org, Msrc Update Guide

    0.6 %

    EPSS score

    Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.

    Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 48.9

    Show all metrics
    Severity
    High
    Priority (0–325)

    The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?

    Read in glossary
    81.92 Methodology
    Exploit maturity

    An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.

    Read in glossary
    no public PoC known
    XIEM Effective CVSS

    XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.

    Read in glossary
    7.5 Methodology
    CVSS v3

    CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.

    Read in glossary
    7.5
    EPSS score

    The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.

    Read in glossary
    0.6 %
    Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
    EPSS percentile

    The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.

    Read in glossary
    48.9
    High — this CVE ranks above the median of all CVEs scored today (rank ≥ 36%).
    KEV status

    The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.

    Read in glossary
    —
    Published
    CWE

    CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.

    Read in glossary
    CWE-405

    Detection rules

    No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.

    Classification under NIS2 and CRA

    Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.

    NIS2

    NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.

    Read in glossary
    High technical severity: assess and remediate the vulnerability in vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2 and document the decision.
    CRA

    The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.

    Read in glossary
    From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
    ISO/IEC 27001

    ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.

    Read in glossary
    Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.

    Description

    A flaw was found in OpenSSL. Receiving a DTLS (Datagram Transport Layer Security) record for a future epoch while a handshake is in progress causes OpenSSL to buffer an excessive amount of memory. This allows a peer to cause memory exhaustion, eventually resulting in a denial of service, using a small amount of network traffic.

    Source: redhat_csaf, Ubuntu Security Notices, suse_csaf, Debian Security Advisories, BSI WID Portal, BSI CSAF, cvelistv5, NVD (NIST), Microsoft Security Update Guide

    Affected products

    The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.

    Affected products
    VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
    OpenSSLOpenSSL
    • 3.6.0 – < 3.6.4
    • 1.1.1 – < 1.1.1zi
    • 3.4.0 – < 3.4.7
    • 1.0.2 – < 1.0.2zr
    • 4.0.0 – < 4.0.2
    • 3.5.0 – < 3.5.8
    • 3.0.0 – < 3.0.22
    • 3.6.4
    • 1.1.1zi
    • 3.4.7
    • 1.0.2zr
    • 4.0.2
    • 3.5.8
    • 3.0.22
    opensslopenssl
    • 3.5.0 – < 3.5.8
    • 3.4.0 – < 3.4.7
    • 1.0.2 – < 1.0.2zr
    • 4.0.0 – < 4.0.2
    • 3.6.0 – < 3.6.4
    • 1.1.1 – < 1.1.1zi
    • 3.0.0 – < 3.0.22
    • 3.5.8
    • 3.4.7
    • 1.0.2zr
    • 4.0.2
    • 3.6.4
    • 1.1.1zi
    • 3.0.22
    FreeBSD ProjectFreeBSD OS
    • < 15.1-STABLE
    • < 14.4-STABLE
    • < 15.0-RELEASE-p13
    • < 14.4-RELEASE-p9
    • < 15.1-RELEASE-p3
    • 15.1-STABLE
    • 14.4-STABLE
    • 15.0-RELEASE-p13
    • 14.4-RELEASE-p9
    • 15.1-RELEASE-p3
    MeinbergLANTIME
    • < V7.10.016
    • V7.10.016
    Open SourceOpenSSL
    • < 3.4.7
    • < 4.0.2
    • < 3.5.8
    • < 3.6.4
    • < 3.0.22
    • < 1.1.1zi
    • < 1.0.2zr
    • 3.4.7
    • 4.0.2
    • 3.5.8
    • 3.6.4
    • 3.0.22
    • 1.1.1zi
    • 1.0.2zr
    OracleCommunications
    • 7.5.0
    • 15.0.1.0.0
    • 26.1.202
    • 7.7.0
    • 25.1.100
    • 47.0.0.2.0
    • 7.0.0
    • 6
    • 6.1
    • 7.8.0
    • 24.2.4-25.2.000
    • 7.5.1
    • 25.2.100
    • 8.0-8.1
    • 8.0.1
    • 7.6.0
    • 14
    • 15.1.0.0.0
    • 25.1.200
    • 6.1.1-7.0.0
    • 25.2.200
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —
    • —

    Affected operating systems

    Affected operating systems
    FamilyVendorProductVersion
    Linuxubuntuopenssljammy
    Linuxubuntuopensslnoble
    Linuxubuntuopensslresolute

    Weakness classes (CWE)

    • CWE-405Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification)

      Class

      The product does not properly control situations in which an adversary can cause the product to consume or produce excessive resources without requiring the adversary to invest equivalent work or otherwise prove authorization, i.e., the adversary's influence is "asymmetric."

      Entry at MITRE CWE-405

    References & sources

    Reanalysis & status changes

    Chronological NVD audit events for this CVE — reanalyses, CVSS updates, CPE diffs.

    1. Initial Analysisnvd@nist.gov

      • CPE Configuration: after OR *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 3.5.0 up to (excluding) 3.5.8 *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 3.6.0 up to (excluding) 3.6.4 *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 4.0.0 up to (excluding) 4.0.2 *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 3.4.0 up to (excluding) 3.4.7 *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 1.0.2 up to (excluding) 1.0.2zr *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 1.1.1 up to (excluding) 1.1.1zi *cpe:2.3:a:openssl:openssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 3.0.0 up to (excluding) 3.0.22
      • Reference Type: after OpenSSL Software Foundation: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/4808b5d64176451f3d93d87d0ac9c81a9b13fb23 Types: Patch
      • Reference Type: after OpenSSL Software Foundation: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7110cb2f75806d0bf809eb2f90790d477900be40 Types: Patch
      • Reference Type: after OpenSSL Software Foundation: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a0c8ec557d9cac078f032d76cdf684fe743eb382 Types: Patch
    2. CVE Modified134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

      • CVSS V3.1: after AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
      • SSVC: after {"id":"CVE-2026-54874","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"yes"},{"technical…
    3. New CVE Receivedopenssl-security@openssl.org

      • Affected: after OpenSSL
      • Description: after Issue summary: Receiving a DTLS record for a future epoch while a handshake is in progress causes OpenSSL to buffer far more memory than the record itself requires. Impact summary: A peer can use a small amount of network traffic to make an OpenSSL DTLS endpoint retain a disproportionately large amount of memory, which may lead to a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-405: Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification) Description: While a DTLS handshake is in progress, a peer may legitimately have already moved on to the next epoch (for example, having sent its ChangeCipherSpec and Finished messages) before the local endpoint has processed the same transition, typically because of reordering on the underlying UDP transport. OpenSSL buffers such early records so that they can be processed once the local endpoint catches up. Buffering a record currently retains the entire read buffer it arrived in, which is sized to hold the largest possible DTLS record (around 16 kilobytes), rather than just the bytes that make up the record itself. Up to 100 such records may be buffered per connection. As a result, a peer that sends a stream of small forged records claiming to belong to the next epoch can cause an OpenSSL DTLS endpoint to retain around 1.7 megabytes of memory, despite sending only a small fraction of that amount of data over the network. An attacker therefore gains a memory amplification factor of around 1200, and can multiply the effect across as many associations as it is able to open, making this a remote memory exhaustion Denial of Service risk for DTLS servers. Since the memory retained per connection remains bounded, and any limit an application already places on the number of concurrent associations also bounds the total exposure, this issue has been assessed as Low severity. FIPS impact: no No FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. OpenSSL 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.0, 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 4.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 4.0.2. OpenSSL 3.6 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.4. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.8. OpenSSL 3.4 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.4.7. OpenSSL 3.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.0.22. Premium support customers only: OpenSSL 1.1.1 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1zi OpenSSL 1.0.2 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.2zr This issue was reported on 18 May 2026 by Amazon Web Services. The fix has been developed by Matt Caswell. -- cut (non-publishing metadata for internal use) -- Reported by: Amazon Web Services Fixed by: Matt Caswell
      • CWE: after CWE-405
      • Reference: after https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/4808b5d64176451f3d93d87d0ac9c81a9b13fb23
    Embed badge

    Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.

    Badge preview for CVE-2026-54874
    <a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-54874"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-54874.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-54874 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>