{"id":"CVE-2026-28386","aliases":["BELL-CVE-2026-28386","DEBIAN-CVE-2026-28386","EUVD-2026-19958","GHSA-q457-vx59-3fqg","RHSA-2026:7261"],"status":"published","title":"Out-of-bounds Read in AES-CFB-128 on X86-64 with AVX-512 Support","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read\nof up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.\n\nImpact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.\n\nThe vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks\n(when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides\nfewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer\nmust be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped.\nCFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or\nChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as\nLow severity according to our Security Policy.\n\nOnly x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected.\nOther architectures and systems without VAES support use different code\npaths that are not affected.\n\nOpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","severity":{"version":"3.1","score":7.5,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H","level":"high","assessor":"primary","from":"nvd"},"epss":{"day":"2026-11-10","score":0.00516,"percentile":0.4426,"model":"v2026.06.15"},"facts":{"in_kev":false,"known_exploited":false,"public_exploit":false,"fix_available":true},"cwes":["CWE-125"],"published":"2026-04-07T22:00:50Z","modified":"2026-10-28T02:30:54Z","fixes":[{"ecosystem":"Debian:14","package":"openssl","fixed_in":["3.6.2-1"],"sources":["osv"]}],"affected":[{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Debian:14","package":"openssl","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"3.6.2-1"}]}],"versions":["3.5.1-1","3.5.2-1","3.5.3-1","3.5.4-1","3.5.4-1~deb13u1","3.5.4-1~deb13u2","3.5.5-1","3.5.5-1~deb13u1","3.5.5-1~deb13u2","3.5.6-1~deb13u1","3.5.6-1~deb13u2","3.5.7-1~deb13u1","3.5.7-1~deb13u2","3.5.7-1~deb13u3","3.6.0-1","3.6.0-2","3.6.0~~alpha1-1","3.6.0~~beta1-1","3.6.1-1","3.6.1-2","3.6.1-3"]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Red Hat:hummingbird:1","package":"openssl","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0:3.5.6-0.1.hum1"}]}],"bundled":23},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Red Hat:hummingbird:1","package":"openssl-config-fips","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0:3.5.6-0.1.hum1"}]}],"bundled":23},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Red Hat:hummingbird:1","package":"openssl-devel","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0:3.5.6-0.1.hum1"}]}],"bundled":23},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Red Hat:hummingbird:1","package":"openssl-devel-engine","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0:3.5.6-0.1.hum1"}]}],"bundled":23},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Red Hat:hummingbird:1","package":"openssl-libs","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0:3.5.6-0.1.hum1"}]}],"bundled":23},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Red Hat:hummingbird:1","package":"openssl-perl","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0:3.5.6-0.1.hum1"}]}],"bundled":23}],"products":[{"vendor":"openssl","product":"openssl"}],"references":[{"url":"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260407.txt","tags":["vendor-advisory","Vendor Advisory","advisory","article"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/61f428a2fc6671ede184a19f71e6e495f0689621","tags":["patch","Patch","fix"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28386","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-q457-vx59-3fqg"},{"url":"https://docs.bell-sw.com/security/cves/CVE-2026-28386","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/28xxx/CVE-2026-28386.json","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-28386","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:7261","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://images.redhat.com/","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-9232","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-9231","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-9230","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11187","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-69421","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-69420","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-69419","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-69418","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-68160","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-66199","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-15469","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-15468","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-15467","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-31790","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-31789","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-28389","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-28388","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-28387","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-28386","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-28390","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-22795","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-2673","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-22796","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/advisories/2026/rhsa-2026_7261.json","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2396054","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-9230","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-9230","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2396055","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-9231","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-9231","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2396056","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-9232","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-9232","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430375","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-11187","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-11187","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430376","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-15467","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-15467","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430377","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-15468","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-15468","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430378","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-15469","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-15469","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430379","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-66199","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-66199","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430380","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68160","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-68160","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430381","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-69418","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-69418","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430386","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-69419","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-69419","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430388","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-69420","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-69420","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430387","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-69421","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-69421","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2447327","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-2673","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-2673","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/2157c9d81f7b0bd7dfa25b960e928ec28e8dd63f","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/85977e013f32ceb96aa034c0e741adddc1a05e34","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260313.txt","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430389","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-22795","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22795","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430390","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-22796","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22796","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2451099","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-28386","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2451098","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-28387","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28387","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2451097","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-28388","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28388","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2451096","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-28389","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28389","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2456314","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-28390","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28390","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/01194a8f1941115cd0383bfa91c736dd3993c8bc","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/2e39b7a6993be445fddb9fbce316fa756e0397b6","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/af2a5fecd3e71a29e7568f9c1453dec5cebbaff4","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ea7b4ea4f9f853521ba34830cbcadc970d2e0788","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/fd2f1a6cf53b9ceeca723a001aa4b825d7c7ee75","tags":["article"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2451095","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31789","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31789","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2451094","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31790","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31790","tags":["advisory"]}],"sources":{"cve":[{"id":"CVE-2026-28386","title":"Out-of-bounds Read in AES-CFB-128 on X86-64 with AVX-512 Support","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read\nof up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.\n\nImpact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.\n\nThe vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks\n(when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides\nfewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer\nmust be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped.\nCFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or\nChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as\nLow severity according to our Security Policy.\n\nOnly x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected.\nOther architectures and systems without VAES support use different code\npaths that are not affected.\n\nOpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","status":"published","published":"2026-04-07T22:00:50.164Z","modified":"2026-04-10T20:16:08.389Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":9.1,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H","level":"critical","assessor":"adp"}],"cwes":["CWE-125"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:20:01.969981Z"}],"euvd":[{"id":"EUVD-2026-19958","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read\nof up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.\n\nImpact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.\n\nThe vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks\n(when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides\nfewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer\nmust be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped.\nCFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or\nChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as\nLow severity according to our Security Policy.\n\nOnly x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected.\nOther architectures and systems without VAES support use different code\npaths that are not affected.\n\nOpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","status":"published","published":"2026-04-07T22:00:50Z","modified":"2026-04-10T20:16:08Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":9.1,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H","level":"critical"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T19:24:29.371024Z"}],"ghsa":[{"id":"GHSA-q457-vx59-3fqg","title":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and...","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read\nof up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.\n\nImpact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.\n\nThe vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks\n(when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides\nfewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer\nmust be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped.\nCFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or\nChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as\nLow severity according to our Security Policy.\n\nOnly x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected.\nOther architectures and systems without VAES support use different code\npaths that are not affected.\n\nOpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","status":"published","published":"2026-04-08T00:30:25Z","modified":"2026-04-10T21:32:17Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":9.1,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H","level":"critical"}],"cwes":["CWE-125"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:07:24.880377Z"}],"nvd":[{"id":"CVE-2026-28386","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read\nof up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.\n\nImpact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.\n\nThe vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks\n(when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides\nfewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer\nmust be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped.\nCFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or\nChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as\nLow severity according to our Security Policy.\n\nOnly x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected.\nOther architectures and systems without VAES support use different code\npaths that are not affected.\n\nOpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","status":"published","published":"2026-04-07T22:16:20.513Z","modified":"2026-07-24T23:10:00.563Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.5,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H","level":"high","assessor":"primary"},{"version":"3.1","score":9.1,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H","level":"critical","assessor":"secondary"}],"cwes":["CWE-125"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:12:13.535987Z"}],"osv":[{"id":"BELL-CVE-2026-28386","title":"CVE-2026-28386 does not affect BellSoft software","status":"withdrawn","published":"2026-04-11T06:09:22.246114Z","modified":"2026-04-26T07:15:57.840431Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.5,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H","level":"high"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:28:23.315185Z"},{"id":"CVE-2026-28386","title":"Out-of-bounds Read in AES-CFB-128 on X86-64 with AVX-512 Support","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on\nsystems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read\nof up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.\n\nImpact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to\nDenial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory\npage boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information\ndisclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.\n\nThe vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks\n(when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides\nfewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer\nmust be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped.\nCFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or\nChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as\nLow severity according to our Security Policy.\n\nOnly x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected.\nOther architectures and systems without VAES support use different code\npaths that are not affected.\n\nOpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","status":"published","published":"2026-04-07T22:00:50.164Z","modified":"2026-11-11T10:30:31.621429215Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":9.1,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H","level":"critical"}],"cwes":["CWE-125"],"updated_at":"2026-11-11T11:06:43.350251Z"},{"id":"DEBIAN-CVE-2026-28386","description":"Issue summary: Applications using AES-CFB128 encryption or decryption on systems with AVX-512 and VAES support can trigger an out-of-bounds read of up to 15 bytes when processing partial cipher blocks.  Impact summary: This out-of-bounds read may trigger a crash which leads to Denial of Service for an application if the input buffer ends at a memory page boundary and the following page is unmapped. There is no information disclosure as the over-read bytes are not written to output.  The vulnerable code path is only reached when processing partial blocks (when a previous call left an incomplete block and the current call provides fewer bytes than needed to complete it). Additionally, the input buffer must be positioned at a page boundary with the following page unmapped. CFB mode is not used in TLS/DTLS protocols, which use CBC, GCM, CCM, or ChaCha20-Poly1305 instead. For these reasons the issue was assessed as Low severity according to our Security Policy.  Only x86-64 systems with AVX-512 and VAES instruction support are affected. Other architectures and systems without VAES support use different code paths that are not affected.  OpenSSL FIPS module in 3.6 version is affected by this issue.","status":"published","published":"2026-04-07T22:16:20.513Z","modified":"2026-10-01T03:03:02.259520873Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.5,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H","level":"high"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:45:53.877573Z"},{"id":"RHSA-2026:7261","title":"Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Hardened Images RPMs bug fix and enhancement update","status":"published","published":"2026-04-20T10:11:08Z","modified":"2026-10-20T10:15:09Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":9.8,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H","level":"critical"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:53:22.928316Z"}]}}