{"api_version":"1","generated_at":"2026-10-06T05:28:22+00:00","cve":"CVE-2026-42772","urls":{"html":"https://cve.report/CVE-2026-42772","api":"https://cve.report/api/cve/CVE-2026-42772.json","docs":"https://cve.report/api","cve_org":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42772","nvd":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-42772"},"summary":{"title":"Potential CPU DoS via O(n^2) Fragment Reassembly in QUIC","description":"Issue summary: The QUIC stream reassembly algorithm performance deteriorates\nprogressively as packets are arriving out of order. The worst case has\na quadratic complexity proportional to the number of stream frames kept in\nthe buffer for the received stream data.\n\nImpact summary: A remote QUIC peer that completes the handshake can create\na connection-scoped CPU pressure and potentially a Denial of Service using\ncompliant STREAM frames inside the advertised receive window, with low\nattacker bandwidth.\n\nCWE: CWE-407: Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity\n\nDescription: OpenSSL manages received QUIC stream fragments using a\ndoubly-linked list. While it optimizes for append operations (at the end of\nthe list), it falls back to a head-to-tail linear search for any fragment\nthat does not immediately follow the current `tail`.\n\nBy manipulating the sequence of offsets, an attacker can force the server\nto perform O(n^2) operations, consuming excessive CPU time for the\nQUIC process.\n\nFIPS impact: no\nThe FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of\nthe OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.","state":"PUBLISHED","assigner":"openssl","published_at":"2026-09-29 16:17:07","updated_at":"2026-09-30 21:17:10"},"problem_types":["CWE-407","CWE-407 CWE-407 Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity"],"metrics":[{"version":"3.1","source":"ADP","type":"DECLARED","score":"5.3","severity":"MEDIUM","vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","data":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"LOW","baseScore":5.3,"baseSeverity":"MEDIUM","confidentialityImpact":"NONE","integrityImpact":"NONE","privilegesRequired":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","version":"3.1"}},{"version":"3.1","source":"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0","type":"Secondary","score":"5.3","severity":"MEDIUM","vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","data":{"version":"3.1","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","baseScore":5.3,"baseSeverity":"MEDIUM","attackVector":"NETWORK","attackComplexity":"LOW","privilegesRequired":"NONE","userInteraction":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","confidentialityImpact":"NONE","integrityImpact":"NONE","availabilityImpact":"LOW"}}],"references":[{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/32d0ed8afe1b8c3e7ece725b44663da3d7087a09","name":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/32d0ed8afe1b8c3e7ece725b44663da3d7087a09","refsource":"openssl-security@openssl.org","tags":[],"title":"","mime":"","httpstatus":"","archivestatus":"0"},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/eb2becc0a4baea7f3050a247834d0e5c2ebe1773","name":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/eb2becc0a4baea7f3050a247834d0e5c2ebe1773","refsource":"openssl-security@openssl.org","tags":[],"title":"","mime":"","httpstatus":"","archivestatus":"0"},{"url":"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260929.txt","name":"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260929.txt","refsource":"openssl-security@openssl.org","tags":[],"title":"","mime":"","httpstatus":"","archivestatus":"0"},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ca8402e273af4de5b3f04fa61a0f0c02ce3ae20e","name":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ca8402e273af4de5b3f04fa61a0f0c02ce3ae20e","refsource":"openssl-security@openssl.org","tags":[],"title":"","mime":"","httpstatus":"","archivestatus":"0"},{"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/f42ae513bbda513b3c121d54834040ee4a0eae1a","name":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/f42ae513bbda513b3c121d54834040ee4a0eae1a","refsource":"openssl-security@openssl.org","tags":[],"title":"","mime":"","httpstatus":"","archivestatus":"0"},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-42772","name":"CVE Program record","refsource":"CVE.ORG","tags":["canonical"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-42772","name":"NVD vulnerability detail","refsource":"NVD","tags":["canonical","analysis"]}],"affected":[{"source":"CNA","vendor":"OpenSSL","product":"OpenSSL","version":"affected 4.0.0 4.0.3 semver","platforms":[]},{"source":"CNA","vendor":"OpenSSL","product":"OpenSSL","version":"affected 3.6.0 3.6.5 semver","platforms":[]},{"source":"CNA","vendor":"OpenSSL","product":"OpenSSL","version":"affected 3.5.0 3.5.9 semver","platforms":[]},{"source":"CNA","vendor":"OpenSSL","product":"OpenSSL","version":"affected 3.4.0 3.4.8 semver","platforms":[]}],"timeline":[],"solutions":[],"workarounds":[],"exploits":[],"credits":[{"source":"CNA","value":"Saku0512","lang":"en"},{"source":"CNA","value":"Opal Wright (Trail of Bits)","lang":"en"},{"source":"CNA","value":"Alexandr Nedvedicky","lang":"en"}],"nvd_cpes":[],"vendor_comments":[],"enrichments":{"kev":null,"epss":{"cve_year":"2026","cve_id":"42772","cve":"CVE-2026-42772","epss":"0.003300000","percentile":"0.236890000","score_date":"2026-10-01","updated_at":"2026-10-02 00:12:54"},"legacy_qids":[]},"source_records":{"cve_program":{"containers":{"adp":[{"metrics":[{"cvssV3_1":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"LOW","baseScore":5.3,"baseSeverity":"MEDIUM","confidentialityImpact":"NONE","integrityImpact":"NONE","privilegesRequired":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","version":"3.1"}},{"other":{"content":{"id":"CVE-2026-42772","options":[{"Exploitation":"none"},{"Automatable":"yes"},{"Technical Impact":"partial"}],"role":"CISA Coordinator","timestamp":"2026-09-30T19:35:54.157005Z","version":"2.0.3"},"type":"ssvc"}}],"providerMetadata":{"dateUpdated":"2026-09-30T20:11:09.295Z","orgId":"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0","shortName":"CISA-ADP"},"title":"CISA ADP Vulnrichment"}],"cna":{"affected":[{"defaultStatus":"unaffected","product":"OpenSSL","vendor":"OpenSSL","versions":[{"lessThan":"4.0.3","status":"affected","version":"4.0.0","versionType":"semver"},{"lessThan":"3.6.5","status":"affected","version":"3.6.0","versionType":"semver"},{"lessThan":"3.5.9","status":"affected","version":"3.5.0","versionType":"semver"},{"lessThan":"3.4.8","status":"affected","version":"3.4.0","versionType":"semver"}]}],"credits":[{"lang":"en","type":"reporter","value":"Saku0512"},{"lang":"en","type":"reporter","value":"Opal Wright (Trail of Bits)"},{"lang":"en","type":"remediation developer","value":"Alexandr Nedvedicky"}],"datePublic":"2026-09-29T14:21:57.000Z","descriptions":[{"lang":"en","supportingMedia":[{"base64":false,"type":"text/html","value":"Issue summary: The QUIC stream reassembly algorithm performance deteriorates<br>progressively as packets are arriving out of order. The worst case has<br>a quadratic complexity proportional to the number of stream frames kept in<br>the buffer for the received stream data.<br><br>Impact summary: A remote QUIC peer that completes the handshake can create<br>a connection-scoped CPU pressure and potentially a Denial of Service using<br>compliant STREAM frames inside the advertised receive window, with low<br>attacker bandwidth.<br><br>CWE: CWE-407: Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity<br><br>Description: OpenSSL manages received QUIC stream fragments using a<br>doubly-linked list. While it optimizes for append operations (at the end of<br>the list), it falls back to a head-to-tail linear search for any fragment<br>that does not immediately follow the current `tail`.<br><br>By manipulating the sequence of offsets, an attacker can force the server<br>to perform O(n^2) operations, consuming excessive CPU time for the<br>QUIC process.<br><br>FIPS impact: no<br>The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of<br>the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."}],"value":"Issue summary: The QUIC stream reassembly algorithm performance deteriorates\nprogressively as packets are arriving out of order. The worst case has\na quadratic complexity proportional to the number of stream frames kept in\nthe buffer for the received stream data.\n\nImpact summary: A remote QUIC peer that completes the handshake can create\na connection-scoped CPU pressure and potentially a Denial of Service using\ncompliant STREAM frames inside the advertised receive window, with low\nattacker bandwidth.\n\nCWE: CWE-407: Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity\n\nDescription: OpenSSL manages received QUIC stream fragments using a\ndoubly-linked list. While it optimizes for append operations (at the end of\nthe list), it falls back to a head-to-tail linear search for any fragment\nthat does not immediately follow the current `tail`.\n\nBy manipulating the sequence of offsets, an attacker can force the server\nto perform O(n^2) operations, consuming excessive CPU time for the\nQUIC process.\n\nFIPS impact: no\nThe FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of\nthe OpenSSL FIPS module boundary."}],"metrics":[{"format":"other","other":{"content":{"text":"Low"},"type":"https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"}}],"problemTypes":[{"descriptions":[{"cweId":"CWE-407","description":"CWE-407 Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity","lang":"en","type":"CWE"}]}],"providerMetadata":{"dateUpdated":"2026-09-29T15:32:14.009Z","orgId":"3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5","shortName":"openssl"},"references":[{"name":"OpenSSL Advisory","tags":["vendor-advisory"],"url":"https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260929.txt"},{"name":"4.0.3 git commit","tags":["patch"],"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/f42ae513bbda513b3c121d54834040ee4a0eae1a"},{"name":"3.6.5 git commit","tags":["patch"],"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/32d0ed8afe1b8c3e7ece725b44663da3d7087a09"},{"name":"3.5.9 git commit","tags":["patch"],"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/ca8402e273af4de5b3f04fa61a0f0c02ce3ae20e"},{"name":"3.4.8 git commit","tags":["patch"],"url":"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/eb2becc0a4baea7f3050a247834d0e5c2ebe1773"}],"source":{"discovery":"UNKNOWN"},"title":"Potential CPU DoS via O(n^2) Fragment Reassembly in QUIC","x_generator":{"engine":"Vulnogram 0.2.0"}}},"cveMetadata":{"assignerOrgId":"3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5","assignerShortName":"openssl","cveId":"CVE-2026-42772","datePublished":"2026-09-29T15:32:14.009Z","dateReserved":"2026-04-29T09:22:27.969Z","dateUpdated":"2026-09-30T20:11:09.295Z","state":"PUBLISHED"},"dataType":"CVE_RECORD","dataVersion":"5.2"},"nvd":{"publishedDate":"2026-09-29 16:17:07","lastModifiedDate":"2026-09-30 21:17:10","problem_types":["CWE-407","CWE-407 CWE-407 Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity"],"metrics":{"cvssMetricV31":[{"source":"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0","type":"Secondary","cvssData":{"version":"3.1","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L","baseScore":5.3,"baseSeverity":"MEDIUM","attackVector":"NETWORK","attackComplexity":"LOW","privilegesRequired":"NONE","userInteraction":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","confidentialityImpact":"NONE","integrityImpact":"NONE","availabilityImpact":"LOW"},"exploitabilityScore":3.9,"impactScore":1.4}],"ssvcV203":[{"source":"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0","ssvcData":{"timestamp":"2026-09-30T19:35:54.157005Z","id":"CVE-2026-42772","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"yes"},{"technicalImpact":"partial"}],"role":"CISA Coordinator","version":"2.0.3"}}]},"configurations":[]},"legacy_mitre":{"record":{"CveYear":"2026","CveId":"42772","Ordinal":"1","Title":"Potential CPU DoS via O(n^2) Fragment Reassembly in QUIC","CVE":"CVE-2026-42772","Year":"2026"},"notes":[{"CveYear":"2026","CveId":"42772","Ordinal":"1","NoteData":"Issue summary: The QUIC stream reassembly algorithm performance deteriorates\nprogressively as packets are arriving out of order. The worst case has\na quadratic complexity proportional to the number of stream frames kept in\nthe buffer for the received stream data.\n\nImpact summary: A remote QUIC peer that completes the handshake can create\na connection-scoped CPU pressure and potentially a Denial of Service using\ncompliant STREAM frames inside the advertised receive window, with low\nattacker bandwidth.\n\nCWE: CWE-407: Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity\n\nDescription: OpenSSL manages received QUIC stream fragments using a\ndoubly-linked list. While it optimizes for append operations (at the end of\nthe list), it falls back to a head-to-tail linear search for any fragment\nthat does not immediately follow the current `tail`.\n\nBy manipulating the sequence of offsets, an attacker can force the server\nto perform O(n^2) operations, consuming excessive CPU time for the\nQUIC process.\n\nFIPS impact: no\nThe FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of\nthe OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.","Type":"Description","Title":"Potential CPU DoS via O(n^2) Fragment Reassembly in QUIC"}]}}}