vciy

CVE-2023-3446

INDEX BUILT · 2026-09-20

No source can show you its own past. This one can.

Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.

Excessive time spent checking DH keys and parameters

CVE-2023-34464 of 4 sources documented this
21

rank 21 = 2 + 13 + 0 + 6 + 0

rank@v1 · backlog

Someone is already using it

CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS

EPSS 0.06531  ·  without this subject the record ranks 19

What it costs you if it fires

NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own

CVSS 5.3, from NVD  ·  without this subject the record ranks 8

It is getting worse, not staying still

FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed

no persisting rise in 365 days  ·  without this subject the record ranks 21

How much of the world it touches

NVD CPE configurations

5 products in the CPE ranges  ·  without this subject the record ranks 15

Someone else already set the date

CISA KEV remediation due date

no CISA due date  ·  without this subject the record ranks 21

Unaudited dollar value2 of 3 inputs carry a receipt
Exposure$78,400over the next 30 days, if this record is yours
Movement-$165,000on 2025-11-21, the last material move, 7 months before this reading
Basisassumeda published average, not your estate

$78,400 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.24048551839932833 exposure x 0.06531 likelihood

udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run

$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.

Hindsight · the state

0.06531EPSSNOT IN KEVas of 2026-09-20
Severity5.3 MEDIUMreceipt
Harmunauthenticated · networkreceipt
Exploitationnone in held sources
Defensefix version namedreceipt
Movementdoubled within 72hreceipt
PLATEAU10Minimal movement since 2025-03-30, 477 days at 0.07, as of 2026-07-20. arc-rules@v1

Foresight · where to check next

No weakness class or product neighbourhood is held for this record, so this index cannot name anywhere to check next. That is an absence in the record, not a finding about the software.

Color is a claim, not decoration:the hostile worldthe defenseno signal

Running OpenSSL? Check your version

A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.

Watch this record

Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.

What counts as a move

Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)

Record your call

Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.

AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigated

Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.

Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.

Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness

Written for the ticket you're about to file.

Reachnetwork-reachable · no privileges required · no user interaction · low attack complexityreceipt
ImpactPartial availability lossreceipt
Scored fromCVSS v3.1 · NVD's vectorreceipt
Weakness classCWE-606 Unchecked Input for Loop Conditionreceipt
Published consequencesCWE-606: Availability: DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)[email protected]

CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA

The fix, and how long it's been waiting.

Fixed in3.1.2; 3.0.10; 1.1.1v; 1.0.2zireceipt
Patch available sinceNo dated patch-availability record in held sources. The index holds reference URLs without dates and only the current revision of the CVE record, so the day a fix first existed cannot be derived. Only the versions it landed in.

Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score

Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.

  • RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
  • RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
  • RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
  • RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known

Authority who says so

CVSS, NVD5.3 MEDIUMreceipt
Exploit probability0.06531 · top 7% of all CVEsreceipt
Blast breadth1 product across 1 vendorderived
Assigned byopensslreceipt
Recorded changes51 · last 19 Sep 2026derived

Affected & Fixed Versions as published

Affected productOpenSSLreceipt
Published rangesopenssl 1.0.2; openssl 1.1.1; openssl 3.0.0; openssl 3.1.0receipt
Show all 5 published ranges
openssl 1.0.2
openssl 1.1.1
openssl 3.0.0
openssl 3.1.0
openssl 3.1.1
Fixed in3.1.2; 3.0.10; 1.1.1v; 1.0.2zireceipt

A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.

Did this affect your environment?Answering needs an account.

What it is stated by the CNA

Issue summary: Checking excessively long DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_check(), DH_check_ex() or EVP_PKEY_param_check() to check a DH key or DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service. The function DH_check() performs various checks on DH parameters. One of those checks confirms that the modulus ('p' parameter) is not too large. receipt

Read the rest of the CNA's description

Trying to use a very large modulus is slow and OpenSSL will not normally use a modulus which is over 10,000 bits in length. However the DH_check() function checks numerous aspects of the key or parameters that have been supplied. Some of those checks use the supplied modulus value even if it has already been found to be too large. An application that calls DH_check() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulernable to a Denial of Service attack. The function DH_check() is itself called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_ex() and EVP_PKEY_param_check(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL dhparam and pkeyparam command line applications when using the '-check' option. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.

NVD's analysis a second authority

severity
5.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
weakness
CWE-606; CWE-1333
affected versions
openssl 1.0.2; openssl 1.1.1; openssl 3.0.0; and 2 more, listed in full below
also scored by
5.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

check it yourself openssl.org git.openssl.org git.openssl.org git.openssl.org git.openssl.org receipt

Dated events

2025-03-17EPSS moved 0.00 to 0.152025-11-21EPSS moved 0.15 to 0.01

Movement the material steps

20 Jul 20230.00044
17 Mar 20250.14671 · crossed 0.10 · scoring model v2025.03.14
15 Apr 20250.00807 · crossed 0.10
18 Nov 20250.14671 · crossed 0.10
21 Nov 20250.00949 · crossed 0.10
15 Jun 20260.05533 · scoring model v2026.06.15
20 Jul 20260.06531

This score more than doubled inside 72 hours. Both observations are in the full history below.

Show all 51 observations
20 Jul 20230.00044
29 Jul 20230.00109
1 Aug 20230.00136
4 Aug 20230.00126
16 Aug 20230.00159
4 Oct 20230.00262
28 Nov 20230.00208
8 Feb 20240.00215
11 Jun 20240.00214
18 Jun 20240.00255
25 Jul 20240.00435
20 Aug 20240.00517
15 Oct 20240.00116
23 Oct 20240.00140
17 Dec 20240.00202
29 Dec 20240.00241
8 Feb 20250.00266
17 Mar 20250.14671
29 Mar 20250.20996
30 Mar 20250.14671
15 Apr 20250.00807
6 May 20250.00785
15 May 20250.00807
19 May 20250.00785
15 Jun 20250.00807
18 Jun 20250.00785
1 Jul 20250.00807
14 Jul 20250.00785
21 Jul 20250.00807
30 Jul 20250.00571
6 Aug 20250.00691
16 Aug 20250.00672
1 Oct 20250.00949
27 Oct 20250.00672
28 Oct 20250.00949
18 Nov 20250.14671
21 Nov 20250.00949
4 Dec 20250.00976
17 Dec 20250.00949
18 Dec 20250.00976
25 Dec 20250.00949
27 Dec 20250.00672
28 Dec 20250.00949
11 Jan 20260.00818
27 Jan 20260.00937
15 May 20260.01
27 May 20260.01027
9 Jun 20260.01
13 Jun 20260.00751
15 Jun 20260.05533
20 Jul 20260.06531

51 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt

The full biography

EPSS 0.06531Published2023-07-19Index as of2026-07-20

Exploit probability more than doubled between 2026-06-13 and 2026-06-15 (0.00751 → 0.05533) and the record had been public for 3 years when this index was last written.

Published 2023-07-19 receipt · Index as of 2026-07-20 derived

Siblings and hubs

Records related to this one

Its defect family

openssl

Of the 5 records in this family that state one, this holds the highest EPSS percentile: 0.93316.

Grouped by shared product and weakness, not by shared vulnerability. Each record's own state is on its own page.

Family membership: held values

This record is one of a group, and the group's page describes all of them. This page is kept and dated, and the defect family's own page is the one we offer for indexing: the whole group.

Browse the index from here

These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2023-3446.

What usually comes next

Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.

Everything on this page is free. Public data. Withholding it protects nothing.