<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<cvrfdoc xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/cvrf/1.1" xmlns:cvrf="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/cvrf/1.1">
	<DocumentTitle xml:lang="en">An update for openssl is now available for openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</DocumentTitle>
	<DocumentType>Security Advisory</DocumentType>
	<DocumentPublisher Type="Vendor">
		<ContactDetails>openeuler-security@openeuler.org</ContactDetails>
		<IssuingAuthority>openEuler security committee</IssuingAuthority>
	</DocumentPublisher>
	<DocumentTracking>
		<Identification>
			<ID>openEuler-SA-2026-4418</ID>
		</Identification>
		<Status>Final</Status>
		<Version>1.0</Version>
		<RevisionHistory>
			<Revision>
				<Number>1.0</Number>
				<Date>2026-10-22</Date>
				<Description>Initial</Description>
			</Revision>
		</RevisionHistory>
		<InitialReleaseDate>2026-10-22</InitialReleaseDate>
		<CurrentReleaseDate>2026-10-22</CurrentReleaseDate>
		<Generator>
			<Engine>openEuler SA Tool V1.0</Engine>
			<Date>2026-10-22</Date>
		</Generator>
	</DocumentTracking>
	<DocumentNotes>
		<Note Title="Synopsis" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">openssl security update</Note>
		<Note Title="Summary" Type="General" Ordinal="2" xml:lang="en">An update for openssl is now available for openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</Note>
		<Note Title="Description" Type="General" Ordinal="3" xml:lang="en">OpenSSL is a robust, commercial-grade, and full-featured toolkit for the Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocols.

Security Fix(es):

Issue summary: A certificate with many nameRelativeToCRLIssuer CRL
distribution points causes disproportionate heap growth when OpenSSL caches
X.509 extensions.

Impact summary: Receiving a crafted certificate from a malicious peer can lead
to significant memory pressure and possible Denial of Service in clients or
in servers that solicit client certificates.

CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

Description: A certificate or a set of certificates that fits under the limit for
size of certificates accepted from the peer (~100 KiB) can result in allocation
of several hundred MiB of resident memory on the receiving side
during a normal TLS handshake.  This may be enough to crash the client or
server, if multiple concurrent connections lead to similarly large memory
allocations.

The fix postpones processing of the CRL distribution points extensions in
certificates to the time when the processed value is required for CRL processing.
This avoids keeping large memory allocations for a long time when such
certificates are received.

FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.(CVE-2026-35189)

Issue summary: The generic elliptic-curve scalar multiplication used for
ECDSA and SM2 signature operations with curves that do not have a dedicated
implementation leaks information about the secret nonce through timing.

Impact summary: An attacker able to measure signing times may learn
information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures
can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the
private key.

CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy

Description: The generic elliptic-curve scalar multiplication used for
curves that do not have a dedicated constant-time implementation pads the
secret scalar with non-constant-time BIGNUM operations, so the time taken
depends on the value of the secret scalar derived from the ECDSA and SM2 nonce.

The leak is very small; observing it requires a large number of
measurements. The effect is largest for curves whose group order lies
on a machine-word boundary, such as brainpoolP384r1.

Applications using ECDSA signing over the Brainpool and other generic prime
curves, and SM2 signing on platforms that use the generic implementation,
are vulnerable to this issue.

The NIST curves P-256, P-384 and P-521 use dedicated constant-time
implementations and are not affected.

FIPS Impact: no
The FIPS modules are not affected: the approved NIST curves used in the FIPS
provider have dedicated constant-time implementations and do not use the
affected code path.(CVE-2026-54872)

Issue summary: A CMP client that requests certificate revocation on the basis
of a PKCS#10 CSR may dereference a NULL pointer and terminate abnormally when
processing a crafted revocation response. 

Impact summary: The NULL pointer dereference happens on a read which 
leads to a crash and a Denial of Service for the affected client application.

CWE: CWE-476: NULL-pointer dereference

Description: A CMP client revoking a certificate has to tell the server which
certificate to revoke, and may do so by supplying a PKCS#10 CSR instead of the
certificate itself or its issuer name and serial number. This is
&apos;openssl cmp -cmd rr -csr &lt;file&gt;&apos; on the command line, or
OSSL_CMP_exec_RR_ses() with the certificate supplied via
OSSL_CMP_CTX_set1_p10CSR() through the API.

A CSR does not contain the issuer name and serial number of the certificate,
so the client does not send them. A server may optionally name the
certificate it revoked in its response, and the client then compares that
name against what it sent. Having sent neither an issuer name nor a serial
number, it has nothing to compare against, and a server returning a specially
crafted name causes the client to read from a NULL pointer and crash.

The revocation response is checked for valid message protection before
the affected code is reached, so an attacker must be a malicious or
compromised CMP server, or a man-in-the-middle in possession of the
secret used for message protection. Clients that identify the certificate
to be revoked by a certificate or by issuer and serial number rather
than by a PKCS#10 CSR are not affected.

FIPS impact: no
No FIPS modules are affected by this issue, as the CMP protocol
implementation is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.(CVE-2026-75805)

Issue summary: An established DTLS 1.2 association using an AEAD cipher suite
can be terminated by a single unauthenticated datagram whose encrypted
fragment is shorter than the mandatory explicit IV and authentication tag
overhead.

Impact summary: An attacker who can send a datagram that is routed to an
existing DTLS 1.2 association can tear that association down without knowing
any key material. This is a Denial of Service limited to the targeted
association. There is no memory safety or confidentiality impact.

CWE: CWE-1284: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input

Description: In TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 every record protected by an AEAD cipher
suite carries an explicit IV followed by the ciphertext and an authentication
tag. When decrypting such a record the record layer passed the record length to
the cipher implementation before checking that the record was long enough to
contain the explicit IV and the tag. For a record shorter than that overhead the
cipher implementation rejected the impossible length, and the record layer
treated this as an internal failure and raised a fatal internal_error alert
instead of treating the record as one that failed authentication.

In TLS 1.2 the same record causes a fatal internal_error alert instead of the
expected bad_record_mac alert. Since any undecryptable record already
terminates a TLS connection, this is a protocol conformance issue rather than
a security issue in TLS.

The fix validates the record length against the explicit IV and tag length
before any AEAD processing, so that TLS reports bad_record_mac and DTLS
silently discards the record.

FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.(CVE-2026-75806)

Issue summary: SM2 signature generation uses non-constant-time arithmetic
on secret values, forming a timing side-channel.

Impact summary: An attacker able to measure SM2 signing times may learn
information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures
can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the
private key.

CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy

Description: SM2 signature generation computes the signature value using
variable-time BIGNUM operations on the secret nonce and the private key, so
the time taken to produce an SM2 signature depends on these secret values,
forming a timing side-channel.

Applications performing SM2 signature generation are affected on all
platforms.

FIPS Impact: no
SM2 is not a FIPS algorithm.(CVE-2026-77696)

Issue summary: The DTLS retransmission logic does not correctly handle
a handshake message write that is suspended part-way through.
The retransmitted message can be read past the message buffer and
the retransmission overwrites the internal state the suspended write
needs to resume correctly.

Impact summary: The retransmitted message can disclose a heap memory
to the peer as plaintext handshake data or cause a crash and a Denial
of Service when the read reaches an unmapped memory region.

CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read

Description: DTLS handshake messages can be written out in multiple
fragments, and a write can suspend mid-message (returning WANT_WRITE)
if the underlying transport temporarily cannot accept more data. While
such a write is suspended, the DTLS retransmission timer may
independently fire and ask the retransmission logic to resend an
earlier, already-acknowledged-as-sent message from its retransmit
queue.

The retransmission logic reused the same internal buffer and position
tracking as the message that was still being written, without
resetting the position back to the start of the message being
retransmitted. As a result the retransmission was read starting from
wherever the suspended write had left off, producing a mislabelled
message whose body was leftover bytes from the other, larger message
still in flight - content that was never meant to be sent at that
point, and which could run past the end of the allocated buffer.

Separately, even when the retransmission is positioned correctly,
allowing it to run to completion while another write is suspended
overwrites the same shared bookkeeping that the suspended write
depends on to resume. When the application later resumes the
suspended write (via a subsequent SSL_read(), SSL_write(),
SSL_accept(), or SSL_connect() call), it finds that bookkeeping in a
state inconsistent with the message and aborts the process in
a debugging build.

The fix resets the retransmission&apos;s read position to the start of the
message before resending, and skips retransmission entirely whenever a
handshake write is still suspended, deferring to the next call that
resumes it instead.

FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.(CVE-2026-84782)</Note>
		<Note Title="Topic" Type="General" Ordinal="4" xml:lang="en">An update for openssl is now available for openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3.

openEuler Security has rated this update as having a security impact of high. A Common Vunlnerability Scoring System(CVSS)base score,which gives a detailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVElink(s) in the References section.</Note>
		<Note Title="Severity" Type="General" Ordinal="5" xml:lang="en">High</Note>
		<Note Title="Affected Component" Type="General" Ordinal="6" xml:lang="en">openssl</Note>
	</DocumentNotes>
	<DocumentReferences>
		<Reference Type="Self">
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
		</Reference>
		<Reference Type="openEuler CVE">
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/en/security/cve/detail/?cveId=CVE-2026-35189</URL>
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/en/security/cve/detail/?cveId=CVE-2026-54872</URL>
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/en/security/cve/detail/?cveId=CVE-2026-75805</URL>
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/en/security/cve/detail/?cveId=CVE-2026-75806</URL>
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/en/security/cve/detail/?cveId=CVE-2026-77696</URL>
			<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/en/security/cve/detail/?cveId=CVE-2026-84782</URL>
		</Reference>
		<Reference Type="Other">
			<URL>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-35189</URL>
			<URL>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-54872</URL>
			<URL>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-75805</URL>
			<URL>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-75806</URL>
			<URL>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-77696</URL>
			<URL>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-84782</URL>
		</Reference>
	</DocumentReferences>
	<ProductTree xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/prod/1.1">
		<Branch Type="Product Name" Name="openEuler">
			<FullProductName ProductID="openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</FullProductName>
		</Branch>
		<Branch Type="Package Arch" Name="noarch">
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-help-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-help-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.noarch.rpm</FullProductName>
		</Branch>
		<Branch Type="Package Arch" Name="aarch64">
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.aarch64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-debuginfo-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-debuginfo-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.aarch64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-debugsource-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-debugsource-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.aarch64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-devel-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-devel-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.aarch64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-libs-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-libs-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.aarch64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-perl-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-perl-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.aarch64.rpm</FullProductName>
		</Branch>
		<Branch Type="Package Arch" Name="src">
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.src.rpm</FullProductName>
		</Branch>
		<Branch Type="Package Arch" Name="x86_64">
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.x86_64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-debuginfo-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-debuginfo-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.x86_64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-debugsource-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-debugsource-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.x86_64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-devel-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-devel-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.x86_64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-libs-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-libs-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.x86_64.rpm</FullProductName>
			<FullProductName ProductID="openssl-perl-3.0.12-54" CPE="cpe:/a:openEuler:openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP3">openssl-perl-3.0.12-54.oe2403sp3.x86_64.rpm</FullProductName>
		</Branch>
	</ProductTree>
	<Vulnerability Ordinal="1" xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/vuln/1.1">
		<Notes>
			<Note Title="Vulnerability Description" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">Issue summary: A certificate with many nameRelativeToCRLIssuer CRL
distribution points causes disproportionate heap growth when OpenSSL caches
X.509 extensions.

Impact summary: Receiving a crafted certificate from a malicious peer can lead
to significant memory pressure and possible Denial of Service in clients or
in servers that solicit client certificates.

CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

Description: A certificate or a set of certificates that fits under the limit for
size of certificates accepted from the peer (~100 KiB) can result in allocation
of several hundred MiB of resident memory on the receiving side
during a normal TLS handshake.  This may be enough to crash the client or
server, if multiple concurrent connections lead to similarly large memory
allocations.

The fix postpones processing of the CRL distribution points extensions in
certificates to the time when the processed value is required for CRL processing.
This avoids keeping large memory allocations for a long time when such
certificates are received.

FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.</Note>
		</Notes>
		<ReleaseDate>2026-10-22</ReleaseDate>
		<CVE>CVE-2026-35189</CVE>
		<ProductStatuses>
			<Status Type="Fixed">
				<ProductID>openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</ProductID>
			</Status>
		</ProductStatuses>
		<Threats>
			<Threat Type="Impact">
				<Description>Medium</Description>
			</Threat>
		</Threats>
		<CVSSScoreSets>
			<ScoreSet>
				<BaseScore>5.3</BaseScore>
				<Vector>AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L</Vector>
			</ScoreSet>
		</CVSSScoreSets>
		<Remediations>
			<Remediation Type="Vendor Fix">
				<Description>openssl security update</Description>
				<DATE>2026-10-22</DATE>
				<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
			</Remediation>
		</Remediations>
	</Vulnerability>
	<Vulnerability Ordinal="2" xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/vuln/1.1">
		<Notes>
			<Note Title="Vulnerability Description" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">Issue summary: The generic elliptic-curve scalar multiplication used for
ECDSA and SM2 signature operations with curves that do not have a dedicated
implementation leaks information about the secret nonce through timing.

Impact summary: An attacker able to measure signing times may learn
information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures
can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the
private key.

CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy

Description: The generic elliptic-curve scalar multiplication used for
curves that do not have a dedicated constant-time implementation pads the
secret scalar with non-constant-time BIGNUM operations, so the time taken
depends on the value of the secret scalar derived from the ECDSA and SM2 nonce.

The leak is very small; observing it requires a large number of
measurements. The effect is largest for curves whose group order lies
on a machine-word boundary, such as brainpoolP384r1.

Applications using ECDSA signing over the Brainpool and other generic prime
curves, and SM2 signing on platforms that use the generic implementation,
are vulnerable to this issue.

The NIST curves P-256, P-384 and P-521 use dedicated constant-time
implementations and are not affected.

FIPS Impact: no
The FIPS modules are not affected: the approved NIST curves used in the FIPS
provider have dedicated constant-time implementations and do not use the
affected code path.</Note>
		</Notes>
		<ReleaseDate>2026-10-22</ReleaseDate>
		<CVE>CVE-2026-54872</CVE>
		<ProductStatuses>
			<Status Type="Fixed">
				<ProductID>openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</ProductID>
			</Status>
		</ProductStatuses>
		<Threats>
			<Threat Type="Impact">
				<Description>Low</Description>
			</Threat>
		</Threats>
		<CVSSScoreSets>
			<ScoreSet>
				<BaseScore>3.7</BaseScore>
				<Vector>AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N</Vector>
			</ScoreSet>
		</CVSSScoreSets>
		<Remediations>
			<Remediation Type="Vendor Fix">
				<Description>openssl security update</Description>
				<DATE>2026-10-22</DATE>
				<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
			</Remediation>
		</Remediations>
	</Vulnerability>
	<Vulnerability Ordinal="3" xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/vuln/1.1">
		<Notes>
			<Note Title="Vulnerability Description" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">Issue summary: A CMP client that requests certificate revocation on the basis
of a PKCS#10 CSR may dereference a NULL pointer and terminate abnormally when
processing a crafted revocation response. 

Impact summary: The NULL pointer dereference happens on a read which 
leads to a crash and a Denial of Service for the affected client application.

CWE: CWE-476: NULL-pointer dereference

Description: A CMP client revoking a certificate has to tell the server which
certificate to revoke, and may do so by supplying a PKCS#10 CSR instead of the
certificate itself or its issuer name and serial number. This is
&apos;openssl cmp -cmd rr -csr &lt;file&gt;&apos; on the command line, or
OSSL_CMP_exec_RR_ses() with the certificate supplied via
OSSL_CMP_CTX_set1_p10CSR() through the API.

A CSR does not contain the issuer name and serial number of the certificate,
so the client does not send them. A server may optionally name the
certificate it revoked in its response, and the client then compares that
name against what it sent. Having sent neither an issuer name nor a serial
number, it has nothing to compare against, and a server returning a specially
crafted name causes the client to read from a NULL pointer and crash.

The revocation response is checked for valid message protection before
the affected code is reached, so an attacker must be a malicious or
compromised CMP server, or a man-in-the-middle in possession of the
secret used for message protection. Clients that identify the certificate
to be revoked by a certificate or by issuer and serial number rather
than by a PKCS#10 CSR are not affected.

FIPS impact: no
No FIPS modules are affected by this issue, as the CMP protocol
implementation is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.</Note>
		</Notes>
		<ReleaseDate>2026-10-22</ReleaseDate>
		<CVE>CVE-2026-75805</CVE>
		<ProductStatuses>
			<Status Type="Fixed">
				<ProductID>openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</ProductID>
			</Status>
		</ProductStatuses>
		<Threats>
			<Threat Type="Impact">
				<Description>Medium</Description>
			</Threat>
		</Threats>
		<CVSSScoreSets>
			<ScoreSet>
				<BaseScore>5.3</BaseScore>
				<Vector>AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L</Vector>
			</ScoreSet>
		</CVSSScoreSets>
		<Remediations>
			<Remediation Type="Vendor Fix">
				<Description>openssl security update</Description>
				<DATE>2026-10-22</DATE>
				<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
			</Remediation>
		</Remediations>
	</Vulnerability>
	<Vulnerability Ordinal="4" xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/vuln/1.1">
		<Notes>
			<Note Title="Vulnerability Description" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">Issue summary: An established DTLS 1.2 association using an AEAD cipher suite
can be terminated by a single unauthenticated datagram whose encrypted
fragment is shorter than the mandatory explicit IV and authentication tag
overhead.

Impact summary: An attacker who can send a datagram that is routed to an
existing DTLS 1.2 association can tear that association down without knowing
any key material. This is a Denial of Service limited to the targeted
association. There is no memory safety or confidentiality impact.

CWE: CWE-1284: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input

Description: In TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 every record protected by an AEAD cipher
suite carries an explicit IV followed by the ciphertext and an authentication
tag. When decrypting such a record the record layer passed the record length to
the cipher implementation before checking that the record was long enough to
contain the explicit IV and the tag. For a record shorter than that overhead the
cipher implementation rejected the impossible length, and the record layer
treated this as an internal failure and raised a fatal internal_error alert
instead of treating the record as one that failed authentication.

In TLS 1.2 the same record causes a fatal internal_error alert instead of the
expected bad_record_mac alert. Since any undecryptable record already
terminates a TLS connection, this is a protocol conformance issue rather than
a security issue in TLS.

The fix validates the record length against the explicit IV and tag length
before any AEAD processing, so that TLS reports bad_record_mac and DTLS
silently discards the record.

FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.</Note>
		</Notes>
		<ReleaseDate>2026-10-22</ReleaseDate>
		<CVE>CVE-2026-75806</CVE>
		<ProductStatuses>
			<Status Type="Fixed">
				<ProductID>openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</ProductID>
			</Status>
		</ProductStatuses>
		<Threats>
			<Threat Type="Impact">
				<Description>Medium</Description>
			</Threat>
		</Threats>
		<CVSSScoreSets>
			<ScoreSet>
				<BaseScore>5.3</BaseScore>
				<Vector>AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L</Vector>
			</ScoreSet>
		</CVSSScoreSets>
		<Remediations>
			<Remediation Type="Vendor Fix">
				<Description>openssl security update</Description>
				<DATE>2026-10-22</DATE>
				<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
			</Remediation>
		</Remediations>
	</Vulnerability>
	<Vulnerability Ordinal="5" xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/vuln/1.1">
		<Notes>
			<Note Title="Vulnerability Description" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">Issue summary: SM2 signature generation uses non-constant-time arithmetic
on secret values, forming a timing side-channel.

Impact summary: An attacker able to measure SM2 signing times may learn
information about the per-signature secret nonce, which over many signatures
can, via a lattice / Hidden Number Problem attack, lead to recovery of the
private key.

CWE: CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy

Description: SM2 signature generation computes the signature value using
variable-time BIGNUM operations on the secret nonce and the private key, so
the time taken to produce an SM2 signature depends on these secret values,
forming a timing side-channel.

Applications performing SM2 signature generation are affected on all
platforms.

FIPS Impact: no
SM2 is not a FIPS algorithm.</Note>
		</Notes>
		<ReleaseDate>2026-10-22</ReleaseDate>
		<CVE>CVE-2026-77696</CVE>
		<ProductStatuses>
			<Status Type="Fixed">
				<ProductID>openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</ProductID>
			</Status>
		</ProductStatuses>
		<Threats>
			<Threat Type="Impact">
				<Description>Low</Description>
			</Threat>
		</Threats>
		<CVSSScoreSets>
			<ScoreSet>
				<BaseScore>3.7</BaseScore>
				<Vector>AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N</Vector>
			</ScoreSet>
		</CVSSScoreSets>
		<Remediations>
			<Remediation Type="Vendor Fix">
				<Description>openssl security update</Description>
				<DATE>2026-10-22</DATE>
				<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
			</Remediation>
		</Remediations>
	</Vulnerability>
	<Vulnerability Ordinal="6" xmlns="http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/vuln/1.1">
		<Notes>
			<Note Title="Vulnerability Description" Type="General" Ordinal="1" xml:lang="en">Issue summary: The DTLS retransmission logic does not correctly handle
a handshake message write that is suspended part-way through.
The retransmitted message can be read past the message buffer and
the retransmission overwrites the internal state the suspended write
needs to resume correctly.

Impact summary: The retransmitted message can disclose a heap memory
to the peer as plaintext handshake data or cause a crash and a Denial
of Service when the read reaches an unmapped memory region.

CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read

Description: DTLS handshake messages can be written out in multiple
fragments, and a write can suspend mid-message (returning WANT_WRITE)
if the underlying transport temporarily cannot accept more data. While
such a write is suspended, the DTLS retransmission timer may
independently fire and ask the retransmission logic to resend an
earlier, already-acknowledged-as-sent message from its retransmit
queue.

The retransmission logic reused the same internal buffer and position
tracking as the message that was still being written, without
resetting the position back to the start of the message being
retransmitted. As a result the retransmission was read starting from
wherever the suspended write had left off, producing a mislabelled
message whose body was leftover bytes from the other, larger message
still in flight - content that was never meant to be sent at that
point, and which could run past the end of the allocated buffer.

Separately, even when the retransmission is positioned correctly,
allowing it to run to completion while another write is suspended
overwrites the same shared bookkeeping that the suspended write
depends on to resume. When the application later resumes the
suspended write (via a subsequent SSL_read(), SSL_write(),
SSL_accept(), or SSL_connect() call), it finds that bookkeeping in a
state inconsistent with the message and aborts the process in
a debugging build.

The fix resets the retransmission&apos;s read position to the start of the
message before resending, and skips retransmission entirely whenever a
handshake write is still suspended, deferring to the next call that
resumes it instead.

FIPS impact: no
The affected code is outside the FIPS module boundary.</Note>
		</Notes>
		<ReleaseDate>2026-10-22</ReleaseDate>
		<CVE>CVE-2026-84782</CVE>
		<ProductStatuses>
			<Status Type="Fixed">
				<ProductID>openEuler-24.03-LTS-SP3</ProductID>
			</Status>
		</ProductStatuses>
		<Threats>
			<Threat Type="Impact">
				<Description>High</Description>
			</Threat>
		</Threats>
		<CVSSScoreSets>
			<ScoreSet>
				<BaseScore>8.2</BaseScore>
				<Vector>AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H</Vector>
			</ScoreSet>
		</CVSSScoreSets>
		<Remediations>
			<Remediation Type="Vendor Fix">
				<Description>openssl security update</Description>
				<DATE>2026-10-22</DATE>
				<URL>https://www.openeuler.org/zh/security/security-bulletins/detail/?id=openEuler-SA-2026-4418</URL>
			</Remediation>
		</Remediations>
	</Vulnerability>
</cvrfdoc>