CVE-2026-42770

FFC-DH Peer Validation Uses Attacker-Supplied q

LOW
3.7
CVSS Score
Published: June 9, 2026 at 04:03 PM UTC
Updated: July 23, 2026 at 07:32 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorOpenSSL

Using OpenSSL by OpenSSL?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect OpenSSL - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
LOW3.7
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.5%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

Issue summary: When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the peer key is not properly checked for the subgroup membership. Impact summary: A malicious peer which presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim's p and g parameters, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor (p−1)/q_local), and a public value Y of order r can recover the victim's private key after a small number of key exchange attempts. When EVP_PKEY_derive_set_peer() is called with a DHX (X9.42) peer key, the subgroup membership check Y^q ≡ 1 (mod p) is performed using the peer's own q parameter, not the local key's q. The peer's domain parameters are then matched against the domain parameters of the private key, but the value of q is not compared. A malicious peer who presents an X9.42 key carrying the victim's p, g, a forged q = r (a small prime factor of the cofactor), and a public value Y of order r passes all checks. The shared secret then takes only r distinct values, leaking priv mod r. Repeating for each small-prime factor of the cofactor and combining via CRT recovers the full private key (Lim–Lee / small-subgroup-confinement attack). The realistic attack surface is narrow: principally CMP deployments with long-lived RA/CA DHX keys and bespoke enterprise or government applications using X9.42 DHX static keys with interactive protocols and therefore this issue was assigned Low severity. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are affected by this issue.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

3.0.0 ≤ v < 3.0.213.4.0 ≤ v < 3.4.63.5.0 ≤ v < 3.5.73.6.0 ≤ v < 3.6.34.0.0 ≤ v < 4.0.13.0.03.4.03.5.03.6.04.0.0
Affected range stops below 3.0.21, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.4.6, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.5.7, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.6.3, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 4.0.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

3.7LOWCISA-ADP
Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
HIGH
Privileges
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
LOW
Integrity
NONE
Availability
NONE
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
CWE-325

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card