Search
Search Results (86 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2021-36647 | 2 Arm, Trustedfirmware | 2 Mbed Tls, Mbed Tls | 2026-06-05 | 4.7 Medium |
| Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm in the function mbedtls_mpi_exp_mod() in lignum.c in Mbed TLS Mbed TLS all versions before 3.0.0, 2.27.0 or 2.16.11 allows attackers with access to precise enough timing and memory access information (typically an untrusted operating system attacking a secure enclave such as SGX or the TrustZone secure world) to recover the private keys used in RSA. | ||||
| CVE-2019-16910 | 4 Arm, Debian, Fedoraproject and 1 more | 5 Mbed Crypto, Mbed Tls, Debian Linux and 2 more | 2026-06-05 | 5.3 Medium |
| Arm Mbed TLS before 2.19.0 and Arm Mbed Crypto before 2.0.0, when deterministic ECDSA is enabled, use an RNG with insufficient entropy for blinding, which might allow an attacker to recover a private key via side-channel attacks if a victim signs the same message many times. (For Mbed TLS, the fix is also available in versions 2.7.12 and 2.16.3.) | ||||
| CVE-2020-10932 | 4 Arm, Debian, Fedoraproject and 1 more | 4 Mbed Tls, Debian Linux, Fedora and 1 more | 2026-06-05 | 4.7 Medium |
| An issue was discovered in Arm Mbed TLS before 2.16.6 and 2.7.x before 2.7.15. An attacker that can get precise enough side-channel measurements can recover the long-term ECDSA private key by (1) reconstructing the projective coordinate of the result of scalar multiplication by exploiting side channels in the conversion to affine coordinates; (2) using an attack described by Naccache, Smart, and Stern in 2003 to recover a few bits of the ephemeral scalar from those projective coordinates via several measurements; and (3) using a lattice attack to get from there to the long-term ECDSA private key used for the signatures. Typically an attacker would have sufficient access when attacking an SGX enclave and controlling the untrusted OS. | ||||
| CVE-2015-8036 | 5 Debian, Fedoraproject, Opensuse and 2 more | 5 Debian Linux, Fedora, Opensuse and 2 more | 2026-06-05 | N/A |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in ARM mbed TLS (formerly PolarSSL) 1.3.x before 1.3.14 and 2.x before 2.1.2 allows remote SSL servers to cause a denial of service (client crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code via a long session ticket name to the session ticket extension, which is not properly handled when creating a ClientHello message to resume a session. NOTE: this identifier was SPLIT from CVE-2015-5291 per ADT3 due to different affected version ranges. | ||||
| CVE-2025-53022 | 1 Trustedfirmware | 1 Trusted Firmware-m | 2026-04-15 | 8.6 High |
| TrustedFirmware-M (aka Trusted Firmware for M profile Arm CPUs) before 2.1.3 and 2.2.x before 2.2.1 lacks length validation during a firmware upgrade. While processing a new image, the Firmware Upgrade (FWU) module does not validate the length field of the Type-Length-Value (TLV) structure for dependent components against the maximum allowed size. If the length specified in the TLV exceeds the size of the buffer allocated on the stack, the FWU module will overwrite the buffer (and potentially other stack data) with the TLV's value content. An attacker could exploit this by crafting a malicious TLV entry in the unprotected section of the MCUBoot upgrade image. By setting the length field to exceed the expected structure size, the attacker can manipulate the stack memory of the system during the upgrade process. | ||||
| CVE-2024-45746 | 1 Trustedfirmware | 1 Trusted Firmware-m | 2026-04-15 | 9.8 Critical |
| An issue was discovered in Trusted Firmware-M through 2.1.0. User provided (and controlled) mailbox messages contain a pointer to a list of input arguments (in_vec) and output arguments (out_vec). These list pointers are never validated. Each argument list contains a buffer pointer and a buffer length field. After a PSA call, the length of the output arguments behind the unchecked pointer is updated in mailbox_direct_reply, regardless of the call result. This allows an attacker to write anywhere in the secure firmware, which can be used to take over the control flow, leading to remote code execution (RCE). | ||||