CVE-2026-2673

highEPSS 0.005 · 42 %ileDEEUJPRUUS
grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.51% (42nd) EPSS
CVSS 7.5 · high
Is it mine?
28 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
7 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · cert_bund

EPSS · scored 2026-10-20

Issue summary: An OpenSSL TLS 1.3 server may fail to negotiate the expected preferred key exchange group when its key exchange group configuration includes the default by using the 'DEFAULT' keyword. Impact summary: A less preferred key exchange may be used even when a more preferred group is supported by both client and server, if the group was not included among the client's initial predicated keyshares. This will sometimes be the case with the new hybrid post-quantum groups, if the client chooses to defer their use until specifically requested by the server. If an OpenSSL TLS 1.3 server's configuration uses the 'DEFAULT' keyword to interpolate the built-in default group list into its own configuration, perhaps adding or removing specific elements, then an implementation defect causes the 'DEFAULT' list to lose its 'tuple' structure, and all server-supported groups were treated as a single sufficiently secure 'tuple', with the server not sending a Hello Retry Request (HRR) even when a group in a more preferred tuple was mutually supported. As a result, the client and server might fail to negotiate a mutually supported post-quantum key agreement group, such as 'X25519MLKEM768', if the client's configuration results in only 'classical' groups (such as 'X25519' being the only ones in the client's initial keyshare prediction). OpenSSL 3.5 and later support a new syntax for selecting the most preferred TLS 1.3 key agreement group on TLS servers. The old syntax had a single 'flat' list of groups, and treated all the supported groups as sufficiently secure. If any of the keyshares predicted by the client were supported by the server the most preferred among these was selected, even if other groups supported by the client, but not included in the list of predicted keyshares would have been more preferred, if included. The new syntax partitions the groups into distinct 'tuples' of roughly equivalent security. Within each tuple the most preferred group included among the client's predicted keyshares is chosen, but if the client supports a group from a more preferred tuple, but did not predict any corresponding keyshares, the server will ask the client to retry the ClientHello (by issuing a Hello Retry Request or HRR) with the most preferred mutually supported group. The above works as expected when the server's configuration uses the built-in default group list, or explicitly defines its own list by directly defining the various desired groups and group 'tuples'. No OpenSSL FIPS modules are affected by this issue, the code in question lies outside the FIPS boundary. OpenSSL 3.6 and 3.5 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 3.6 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.2 once it is released. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.6 once it is released. OpenSSL 3.4, 3.3, 3.0, 1.0.2 and 1.1.1 are not affected by this issue.

01

remediations

Vendor fix, mitigation, or workaround guidance, as published by each source.

A vendor fix is available.

02

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

7.5
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · medium–high · 6–7.5

v3.17.5highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:Nsecondary · CISA US
v3.16.5mediumAV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU
v3.16.5mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.16.5mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondaryexploitability 3.9 · impact 2.5
v3.17.5highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:Nsecondary · Siemens ProductCERT DE
v3.16mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
03

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Exploitation: none · Automatable: yes · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
04

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

05

affected products (28)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

06

advisories (4)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • SSA-032379SSA-032379: Multiple Vulnerabilities in SIMATIC CN 4100 Before V5.02026-05-12csaf · siemens_psirtDE

    SIMATIC CN 4100 contains multiple vulnerabilities which could potentially lead to a compromise in availability, integrity and confidentiality. Siemens has released a new version for SIMATIC CN 4100 and recommends to update to the latest version.

  • WID-SEC-W-2026-0729OpenSSL: Schwachstelle ermöglicht Umgehen von SicherheitsvorkehrungenDeutsch2026-03-15csaf · cert_bundDE

    Ein entfernter, authentisierter Angreifer kann eine Schwachstelle in OpenSSL ausnutzen, um Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen.

  • ICSA-26-134-10Siemens SIMATIC2026-05-12icsa · cisa_csaf_otUS

    SIMATIC CN 4100 contains multiple vulnerabilities which could potentially lead to a compromise in availability, integrity and confidentiality. Siemens has released a new version for SIMATIC CN 4100 and recommends to update to the latest version.

  • JVNDB-2026-026852JVN iPedia advisory JVNDB-2026-0268522026-08-05vendor · jvndbJP
07

also known as (4)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

08

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

09

references (14)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan