CVE-2025-11187 — Improper validation of PBMAC1 parameters in PKCS#12 MAC verification
Issue summary: PBMAC1 parameters in PKCS#12 files are missing validation which can trigger a stack-based buffer overflow, invalid pointer or NULL pointer dereference during MAC verification. Impact summary: The stack buffer overflow or NULL pointer dereference may cause a crash leading to Denial of Service for an application that parses untrusted PKCS#12 files. The buffer overflow may also potentially enable code execution depending on platform mitigations. When verifying a PKCS#12 file that uses PBMAC1 for the MAC, the PBKDF2 salt and keylength parameters from the file are used without validation. If the value of keylength exceeds the size of the fixed stack buffer used for the derived key (64 bytes), the key derivation will overflow the buffer. The overflow length is attacker-controlled. Also, if the salt parameter is not an OCTET STRING type this can lead to invalid or NULL pointer dereference. Exploiting this issue requires a user or application to process a maliciously crafted PKCS#12 file. It is uncommon to accept untrusted PKCS#12 files in applications as they are usually used to store private keys which are trusted by definition. For this reason the issue was assessed as Moderate severity. The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5 and 3.4 are not affected by this issue, as PKCS#12 processing is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5 and 3.4 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 3.3, 3.0, 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are not affected by this issue as they do not support PBMAC1 in PKCS#12.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 5.1% (30-day exploitation probability)+14
- Technical severity (medium)+3
- CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.
CISA SSVC assessment CISA
Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Openssl Openssl).
- Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
- Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
- EPSS ahead of 92% of scored CVEs: prioritize it in the patch queue.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (memory corruption), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | 1.3 | 4.7 | 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 6.1 | CVSS 3.1 | Medium | — | — | CISA-ADP via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H (score shown at the top: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
EPSS over time FIRST
Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 15, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 5.14%
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
- Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · openssl/openssl
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- Fix documented
- CVSS changed · 6.1
- Source status changed · → Modified
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
References
5 on the record
- openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20260127.txt
- github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/8caf359d6e46fb413e8f5f0df765d2e8a51df4e8
- github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/e1079bc17ed93ff16f6b86f33a2fe3336e78817e
- github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/205e3a55e16e4bd08c12fdbd3416ab829c0f6206
- github.com/metadust/CVE-2025-11187
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- High CVE-2026-84783 Use-After-Free in X.509 Extension Cache Under Concurrent Use 16d
- High CVE-2026-84784 QUIC: Unbounded RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID Backlog 16d
- High CVE-2026-84782 DTLS Retransmits Handshake Messages From a Stale Buffer Offset 16d
- Medium CVE-2026-75805 NULL Pointer Dereference in CMP Client Revocation Response Handling 16d
- Medium CVE-2026-75806 Unauthenticated and Undersized DTLS 1.2 AEAD Record Causes DoS 16d
- Low CVE-2026-77696 Timing Side-Channel in SM2 Signature Generation 16d
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record
Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2025-11187 is "Improper validation of PBMAC1 parameters in PKCS#12 MAC verification", rated Medium. It affects Openssl (Openssl); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 5.14% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.
Comments
Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.
No comments yet.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.