Skip to main content

openssl-encrypt EUVDEUVD-2026-67037

| CVE-2026-81681 CRITICAL
Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data (CWE-311)
2026-08-27 VulnCheck GHSA-c4f3-9gjw-6j6x
9.3
CVSS 4.0 · Vendor: VulnCheck
View

Attack ChainAIDerived

Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain

  1. Access
    Obtain lost or stolen USB media
  2. Exploit
    Mount removable device on attacker machine
  3. Execution
    Read cleartext 'Encrypted USB Workspace' files
  4. Impact
    Exfiltrate sensitive data

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A06:2025 - Insecure Design
ASVS 5.0
V14 - Data Protection Encryption of sensitive data
Exploitation Conditions

Exploitation requires physical possession of or access to the removable/USB media on which the victim created an openssl_encrypt 'Encrypted USB Workspace' using a vulnerable version (<= 1.4.8), and the victim must have actually used that workspace feature to store files. The limiting factors are significant: the attacker needs the physical device (no remote/network path despite the input's AV:N rating), the victim must have opted into the specific 'Encrypted USB Workspace' feature rather than another encryption mode, and only data placed in that workspace is exposed. There is no user interaction or authentication barrier for the attacker once the media is in hand, and the impact is confidentiality only - the false 'encrypted' marker does not protect the plaintext beneath it.

Impact

The signals conflict and must be reconciled. The supplied CVSS 4.0 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H, score 9.3) models a remote, unauthenticated, full-CIA-impact flaw, but the description clearly requires an attacker with PHYSICAL access to the removable media and yields only confidentiality loss (reading cleartext files). The AV:N and VI:H/VA:H ratings are not supported by the description - verify with the vendor; a physical-access, confidentiality-only assessment is far more defensible (see assessed vectors below). There is no EPSS score, no KEV listing, and no POC provided, so this is not evidence of widespread active exploitation. Real-world risk is a targeted, opportunistic threat: someone who steals, finds, or borrows the USB device gets plaintext, and the danger is amplified because victims believe the data is encrypted and may therefore be less careful with the media. Absolute risk is bounded by the product's niche footprint and the physical-access requirement, not the inflated 9.3.

Exploit ScenarioDerived

A user encrypts sensitive documents into what openssl_encrypt labels an 'Encrypted USB Workspace,' sees the marker confirming AES-256-GCM protection, and carries the USB drive with them. The drive is lost or stolen, or briefly left unattended; the attacker plugs it into any machine and reads the files directly because they were never encrypted. No POC is needed and no cryptographic attack is required - the data is simply cleartext.

Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Why: CRITICAL severity.
Patch available 0.1% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – Aug 27, 2026

Sensitive-file exposure in the openssl-encrypt pip package (openssl_encrypt) at versions <= 1.4.8 stems from its 'Encrypted USB Workspace' feature writing a marker that falsely declares the workspace AES-256-GCM encrypted while the derived key is never applied and the directory remains in cleartext. Users who trust the branding and store files in the workspace leave them fully readable on the removable media, so anyone with physical possession of the USB device can recover the data. No public exploit identified at time of analysis and the flaw is not in CISA KEV, but the failure silently defeats the product's core security promise.

RemediationAI

Vendor-released patch: upgrade to openssl_encrypt 1.4.9 (pip install --upgrade openssl-encrypt), which seals the workspace into an authenticated AES-256-GCM vault so data is genuinely encrypted at rest; this is the primary and complete fix per GHSA-2jv6-qqfm-m46m. Because any workspace created with <= 1.4.8 is already cleartext on the media, patching alone is insufficient - treat all existing 'Encrypted USB Workspace' data as exposed: physically secure or wipe/re-provision those devices, rotate any secrets stored on them, and re-create the workspace under 1.4.9 so encryption is actually applied. As an interim compensating control before upgrading, do not rely on the workspace feature - store sensitive files in an independently verified encryption container (for example OS-level volume encryption such as LUKS, BitLocker To Go, or VeraCrypt on the removable media) and keep physical custody of the USB device; the trade-off is loss of the product's convenience workflow. Verify encryption independently by inspecting raw bytes on the device rather than trusting the in-workspace marker.

Affected VersionsENISA

openssl_encrypt 0 <1.4.9

Affected Packages

pypi openssl-encrypt fix: 1.4.9

Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)

Affects your stack

Affects 1 package in pypi

Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.

Technical ContextAI · show details

The affected component is jahlives' openssl_encrypt, a Python utility distributed on PyPI as openssl-encrypt (CPE cpe:2.3:a:jahlives:openssl_encrypt). The 'Encrypted USB Workspace' feature is intended to provide an authenticated AES-256-GCM encrypted container on portable/removable media, deriving an encryption key and sealing files at rest. The root cause maps to CWE-311 (Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data): the code advertises encryption and even persists a marker asserting the workspace is encrypted, but never actually applies the derived key to the workspace contents. The result is a trust/labeling mismatch - cryptographic material may be generated, but the plaintext-to-ciphertext transformation of the workspace data is absent, so the security control exists only in branding.

Know when OpenSSL gets its next vulnerability

  • Watch products and get an email when something new is published
  • Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
  • Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources

No credit card · 7-day full trial

Severity by source

Vendor (VulnCheck) PRIMARY 9.3 CRITICAL
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
vuln.today AI 4.6 MEDIUM

Attack needs physical access to the removable media (AV:P) and yields only disclosure of cleartext files (C:H, I:N, A:N); no auth or user interaction for the attacker.

3.1 AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
4.0 AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Primary rating from Vendor (VulnCheck).

CVSS VectorVendor: VulnCheck

Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
Low
Attack Requirements
None
Privileges Required
None
User Interaction
None
Vulnerable system: Confidentiality
High
Vulnerable system: Integrity
High
Vulnerable system: Availability
High
Subsequent system: Confidentiality
None
Subsequent system: Integrity
None
Subsequent system: Availability
None

Lifecycle Timeline

2
Patch available
Aug 27, 2026 - 18:02 EUVD
CVE Published
Aug 27, 2026 - 14:50 cve.org
CRITICAL 9.3

DescriptionCVE.org

openssl_encrypt (pip package openssl-encrypt) versions <= 1.4.8 advertise a portable USB workspace as an 'Encrypted USB Workspace' with AES-256-GCM encryption and write a marker declaring the workspace encrypted, but the workspace directory is actually stored in cleartext and the derived encryption key is never applied to it. A user who trusts the branding and places files in the workspace leaves them unencrypted on the removable media, so an attacker with physical access to the media can read the sensitive files. Fixed in 1.4.9, which seals the workspace into an authenticated AES-256-GCM vault.

Executive ViewAI

Why It Matters

The openssl-encrypt pip package (versions ≤1.4.8) contains a critical flaw in its 'Encrypted USB Workspace' feature: files are stored in cleartext while a false marker claims AES-256-GCM encryption, creating a silent confidentiality breach. Organizations relying on this package for USB data protection face complete loss of encryption assurance; physical access to USB devices exposes all stored data.

Business Impact: Severe
Compensating Controls

No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations: discontinue Encrypted USB Workspace feature immediately; migrate to alternative cryptographic solutions with published security audits; enforce physical security protocols for all USB devices; require air-gapped or non-portable storage for sensitive data; conduct inventory of all USB devices that may contain data encrypted with this tool.

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.1%
Top 97% exploitable
Prevalence
Rare
obscure single-author PyPI utility, minimal enterprise deployment footprint
Data Quality
6 sources
Confidence: High

How this decision was reached

The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.

SignalValue
Severity CRITICAL
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.1%
Patch available Yes
Active threat No
Deciding rule
CRITICAL severity
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision
Scheduled
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Open
Automatable
No
Human Impact
Very High
Technical Impact
Partial

Priority Score

46
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +46
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

Attack Technique

Information disclosure occurs when an application unintentionally exposes sensitive data that aids attackers in reconnaissance or directly compromises security.

CVE-2014-0160 HIGH POC
7.5 Apr 07

The (1) TLS and (2) DTLS implementations in OpenSSL 1.0.1 before 1.0.1g do not properly handle Heartbeat Extension packe

CVE-2021-3711 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Aug 24

In order to decrypt SM2 encrypted data an application is expected to call the API function EVP_PKEY_decrypt(). Rated cri

CVE-2014-0195 MEDIUM POC
6.8 Jun 05

The dtls1_reassemble_fragment function in d1_both.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0

CVE-2014-0224 HIGH POC
7.4 Jun 05

OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h does not properly restrict processing of ChangeCiph

CVE-2016-0800 MEDIUM POC
5.9 Mar 01

The SSLv2 protocol, as used in OpenSSL before 1.0.1s and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2g and other products, requires a server to se

CVE-2015-0204 MEDIUM POC
4.3 Jan 09

The ssl3_get_key_exchange function in s3_clnt.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8zd, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0p, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1k

CVE-2022-2068 HIGH
7.3 Jun 21

In addition to the c_rehash shell command injection identified in CVE-2022-1292, further circumstances where the c_rehas

CVE-2015-4000 LOW POC
3.7 May 21

The TLS protocol 1.2 and earlier, when a DHE_EXPORT ciphersuite is enabled on a server but not on a client, does not pro

CVE-2014-3566 LOW POC
3.4 Oct 15

The SSL protocol 3.0, as used in OpenSSL through 1.0.1i and other products, uses nondeterministic CBC padding, which mak

CVE-2016-2107 MEDIUM POC
5.9 May 05

The AES-NI implementation in OpenSSL before 1.0.1t and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2h does not consider memory allocation during a

CVE-2015-1793 MEDIUM POC
6.5 Jul 09

The X509_verify_cert function in crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c in OpenSSL 1.0.1n, 1.0.1o, 1.0.2b, and 1.0.2c does not properly

CVE-2022-3602 HIGH
7.5 Nov 01

A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Rated hig

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy