Mend.io Vulnerability Database
The largest open source vulnerability database
What is a Vulnerability ID?
New vulnerability? Tell us about it!
CVE-2026-45446
Published:June 09, 2026
Updated:June 11, 2026
Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated Data) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages. Impact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD to the victim's application using these ciphers. AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD modes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated but not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte tag. On decrypt, "EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()" is documented to return success only if the tag is verified succesfully. In OpenSSL's provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is computed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data. If the caller supplies AAD and then calls "EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()" without invocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received ciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its all-zeros value. When AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty ciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not know, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it's necessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without resetting the key. AES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.2. No protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support either AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must implement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the ciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
Affected Packages
openssl (CONDA):
Affected version(s) >=3.5.0 <3.5.7
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version 3.5.7
openssl (CONDA):
Affected version(s) >=3.0.0 <3.0.21
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version 3.0.21
openssl (CONDA):
Affected version(s) >=3.4.0 <3.4.6
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version 3.4.6
openssl (CONDA):
Affected version(s) >=3.6.0 <3.6.3
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version 3.6.3
https://github.com/openssl/openssl.git (GITHUB):
Affected version(s) >=openssl-3.4.0 <openssl-3.4.6
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version openssl-3.4.6
https://github.com/openssl/openssl.git (GITHUB):
Affected version(s) >=openssl-3.6.0 <openssl-3.6.3
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version openssl-3.6.3
https://github.com/openssl/openssl.git (GITHUB):
Affected version(s) =openssl-4.0.0 <openssl-4.0.1
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version openssl-4.0.1
https://github.com/openssl/openssl.git (GITHUB):
Affected version(s) >=openssl-3.5.0 <openssl-3.5.7
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version openssl-3.5.7
https://github.com/openssl/openssl.git (GITHUB):
Affected version(s) >=openssl-3.0.0 <openssl-3.0.21
Fix Suggestion:
Update to version openssl-3.0.21
Do you need more information?
Contact Us
CVSS v4
Base Score:
6.3
Attack Vector
NETWORK
Attack Complexity
HIGH
Attack Requirements
NONE
Privileges Required
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Vulnerable System Confidentiality
LOW
Vulnerable System Integrity
LOW
Vulnerable System Availability
NONE
Subsequent System Confidentiality
NONE
Subsequent System Integrity
NONE
Subsequent System Availability
NONE
CVSS v3
Base Score:
4.8
Attack Vector
NETWORK
Attack Complexity
HIGH
Privileges Required
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
LOW
Integrity
LOW
Availability
NONE
Weakness Type (CWE)
Missing Cryptographic Step
EPSS
Base Score:
0.01