BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence

Full vulnerability report · 2026

CVE-2025-69418High confidence

Unauthenticated/unencrypted trailing bytes with low-level OCB function calls

OpenSSL · OpenSSL

4.0MediumCVSS 3.1

Recommended action

Scheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available

Distribution package intelligence

Ubuntu vendor package status

Canonical’s release and source-package findings are shown separately from local repository availability.

2 package states

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Ubuntu release	Source package	Vendor state	Fixed version	Evidence
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive	`edk2`	Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing.	`Not published in this feed`	Canonical record ↗Source updated 8 Sept 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive	`openssl`	Vendor fix publishedCanonical reports that a fixed source package version has been published. Repository candidate availability is not checked by BlackTree.	`3.0.13-0ubuntu3.7`	Canonical record ↗Source updated 8 Sept 2026

Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

2 current

CVE-2025-69418 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securityopenssl: OpenSSL: Information disclosure and data tampering via specific low-level OCB encryption/decryption calls

60 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

edk2-aarch64 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
edk2-ovmf as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
edk2-tools as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
edk2-tools-doc as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
edk2.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
mokutil as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
shim-aa64 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
shim-unsigned-aarch64.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
shim-unsigned-x64.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
shim-x64 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
openssl as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
openssl-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6

Summary: A flaw was found in OpenSSL. When applications directly call the low-level CRYPTO_ocb128_encrypt() or CRYPTO_ocb128_decrypt() functions with non-block-aligned lengths in a single call on hardware-accelerated builds, the trailing 1-15 bytes of a message may be exposed in cleartext. These exposed bytes are not covered by the authentication tag, allowing an attacker to read or tamper with them without detection.
Remediation: For details on how to apply this update, which includes the changes described in this advisory, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258

SSA-265688 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 13 · interimSiemens ProductCERTSSA-265688: Vulnerabilities in the additional GNU/Linux subsystem of the SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP V1.1

1 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP - GNU/Linux subsystem

Summary: Issue summary: When using the low-level OCB API directly with AES-NI or other hardware-accelerated code paths, inputs whose length is not a multiple of 16 bytes can leave the final partial block unencrypted and unauthenticated. Impact summary: The trailing 1-15 bytes of a message may be exposed in cleartext on encryption and are not covered by the authentication tag, allowing an attacker to read or tamper with those bytes without detection. The low-level OCB encrypt and decrypt routines in the hardware-accelerated stream path process full 16-byte blocks but do not advance the input/output pointers. The subsequent tail-handling code then operates on the original base pointers, effectively reprocessing the beginning of the buffer while leaving the actual trailing bytes unprocessed. The authentication checksum also excludes the true tail bytes. However, typical OpenSSL consumers using EVP are not affected because the higher-level EVP and provider OCB implementations split inputs so that full blocks and trailing partial blocks are processed in separate calls, avoiding the problematic code path. Additionally, TLS does not use OCB ciphersuites. The vulnerability only affects applications that call the low-level CRYPTO_ocb128_encrypt() or CRYPTO_ocb128_decrypt() functions directly with non-block-aligned lengths in a single call on hardware-accelerated builds. For these reasons the issue was assessed as Low severity. The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as OCB mode is not a FIPS-approved algorithm. OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.0 and 1.1.1 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not affected by this issue.
Remediation: Limit access to the interactive shell of the additional GNU/Linux subssytem to trusted personnel only.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current

ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2025-206396

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state: Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation: Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score: Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence: No linked advisory details stored yet

Recommended actionScheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available

What, why and how

Issue summary: When using the low-level OCB API directly with AES-NI or other hardware-accelerated code paths, inputs whose length is not a multiple of 16 bytes can leave the final partial block unencrypted and unauthenticated. Impact summary: The trailing 1-15 bytes of a message may be exposed in cleartext on encryption and are not covered by the authentication tag, allowing an attacker to read or tamper with those bytes without detection. The low-level OCB encrypt and decrypt routines in the hardware-accelerated stream path process full 16-byte blocks but do not advance the input/output pointers. The subsequent tail-handling code then operates on the original base pointers, effectively reprocessing the beginning of the buffer while leaving the actual trailing bytes unprocessed. The authentication checksum also excludes the true tail bytes. However, typical OpenSSL consumers using EVP are not affected because the higher-level EVP and provider OCB implementations split inputs so that full blocks and trailing partial blocks are processed in separate calls, avoiding the problematic code path. Additionally, TLS does not use OCB ciphersuites. The vulnerability only affects applications that call the low-level CRYPTO_ocb128_encrypt() or CRYPTO_ocb128_decrypt() functions directly with non-block-aligned lengths in a single call on hardware-accelerated builds. For these reasons the issue was assessed as Low severity. The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as OCB mode is not a FIPS-approved algorithm. OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.0 and 1.1.1 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not affected by this issue.

What

Why

The product does not implement a required step in a cryptographic algorithm, resulting in weaker encryption than advertised by the algorithm.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

Why

The product does not implement a required step in a cryptographic algorithm, resulting in weaker encryption than advertised by the algorithm.

How

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation

Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.

No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material

Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.

None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path: local access → Missing Cryptographic Step → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface: Local
Privileges required: None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction: None
Attack complexity: High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary: Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness ? CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.: CWE-325 ↗
CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step. The product does not implement a required step in a cryptographic algorithm, resulting in weaker encryption than advertised by the algorithm.
CVSS vector ? CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land: The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.

UnauthenticatedCWE-325

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-206396Official EUVD mapping

0 linked advisory records.

Official EUVD record

BSI · German · WID-SEC-W-2026-2253IBM Security Verify Access: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in IBM Security Verify Access ausnutzen, um erweiterte Berechtigungen zu erlangen, beliebigen Code auszuführen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren, sensible Informationen offenzulegen und andere, nicht näher bezeichnete Angriffe durchzuführen.

Unauthenticated/unencrypted trailing bytes with low-level OCB function calls

National CERT insights ?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

EUVD-2025-206396

What, why and how

Exploit reality and attack path

Official authority intelligence

Patch and workaround

Evidence and provenance

National CERT insights
?
CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.