Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.15% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligencewolfSSL · wolfSSL
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 3 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 3 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 3 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.
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.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | wolfssl | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | wolfssl | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | wolfssl | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | wolfssl | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 3 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by productA (D)TLS 1.2 client can accept a ChangeCipherSpec message before it has sent its ClientKeyExchange. No master secret has been derived at that point, so the client installs read keys derived from a known (deterministic) key and checks the server's Finished against that same key. An out-of-order ChangeCipherSpec can therefore be used by an attacker to complete the handshake in place of the server and send data the client accepts as authentic. The client's own traffic still uses correctly derived keys, so the attacker cannot read it, and the genuine server never completes the handshake. DTLS 1.2 clients are exposed because a datagram read can deliver the out-of-order records on its own. TLS 1.2 clients are exposed when the application supplies received bytes with wolfSSL_inject() or enables read ahead. For certificate suites, the attacker must be in a man-in-the-middle position. For PSK (Pre Shared Key) connections, any fake server can succeed without knowing the PSK.
A (D)TLS 1.2 client can accept a ChangeCipherSpec message before it has sent its ClientKeyExchange. No master secret has been derived at that point, so the client installs read keys derived from a known (deterministic) key and checks the server's Finished against that same key. An out-of-order ChangeCipherSpec can therefore be used by an attacker to complete the handshake in place of the server and send data the client accepts as authentic. The client's own traffic still uses correctly derived keys, so the attacker cannot read it, and the genuine server never completes the handshake. DTLS 1.2 clients are exposed because a datagram read can deliver the out-of-order records on its own. TLS 1.2 clients are exposed when the application supplies received bytes with wolfSSL_inject() or enables read ahead. For certificate suites, the attacker must be in a man-in-the-middle position. For PSK (Pre Shared Key) connections, any fake server can succeed without knowing the PSK.
The product performs multiple related behaviors, but the behaviors are performed in the wrong order in ways that may produce resultant weaknesses.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
A (D)TLS 1.2 client can accept a ChangeCipherSpec message before it has sent its ClientKeyExchange. No master secret has been derived at that point, so the client installs read keys derived from a known (deterministic) key and checks the server's Finished against that same key. An out-of-order ChangeCipherSpec can therefore be used by an attacker to complete the handshake in place of the server and send data the client accepts as authentic. The client's own traffic still uses correctly derived keys, so the attacker cannot read it, and the genuine server never completes the handshake. DTLS 1.2 clients are exposed because a datagram read can deliver the out-of-order records on its own. TLS 1.2 clients are exposed when the application supplies received bytes with wolfSSL_inject() or enables read ahead. For certificate suites, the attacker must be in a man-in-the-middle position. For PSK (Pre Shared Key) connections, any fake server can succeed without knowing the PSK.
The product performs multiple related behaviors, but the behaviors are performed in the wrong order in ways that may produce resultant weaknesses.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-696: Incorrect Behavior Order. The product performs multiple related behaviors, but the behaviors are performed in the wrong order in ways that may produce resultant weaknesses.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 27 Sept 2026 · Last source change 29 Sept 2026, 16:43 UTC · CWE-696 · Incorrect Behavior Order
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.