CVE-2026-54874

Excessive Memory Use Buffering DTLS Records for a Future Epoch

HIGH
7.5
CVSS Score
Published: August 25, 2026 at 12:59 PM UTC
Updated: September 11, 2026 at 09:30 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
HIGH7.5
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.6%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

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

Affected

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

1.0.2 ≤ v < 1.0.2zr1.1.1 ≤ v < 1.1.1zi3.0.0 ≤ v < 3.0.223.4.0 ≤ v < 3.4.73.5.0 ≤ v < 3.5.83.6.0 ≤ v < 3.6.44.0.0 ≤ v < 4.0.21.0.21.1.13.0.03.4.03.5.03.6.04.0.0
Affected range stops below 1.0.2zr, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 1.1.1zi, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.0.22, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.4.7, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.5.8, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 3.6.4, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 4.0.2, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitAutomatablePartial impact

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

CVSS

7.5HIGHCISA-ADP
Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
NONE
Availability
HIGH
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusANALYZED
CWE
CWE-405

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