openssl - Debian Package Tracker

general

source: openssl (main)
version: 3.6.5-1
maintainer: Debian OpenSSL Team (archive) (DMD)
uploaders: Christoph Martin (DMD) – Kurt Roeckx (DMD) – Sebastian Andrzej Siewior (DMD)
arch: all any
std-ver: 4.7.2
VCS: Git (Browse, QA)

versions [more versions can be listed by madison] [old versions available from snapshot.debian.org]

[pool directory]

o-o-stable: 1.1.1w-0+deb11u1
o-o-sec: 1.1.1w-0+deb11u8
oldstable: 3.0.20-1~deb12u2
old-sec: 3.0.22-1~deb12u2
old-upd: 3.0.17-1~deb12u2
old-p-u: 3.0.20-1~deb12u2
stable: 3.5.6-1~deb13u2
stable-sec: 3.5.7-1~deb13u3
stable-p-u: 3.5.9-1~deb13u1
testing: 3.6.5-1
unstable: 3.6.5-1
exp: 4.0.3-1

versioned links

1.1.1w-0+deb11u1: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
1.1.1w-0+deb11u8: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.0.17-1~deb12u2: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.0.20-1~deb12u2: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.0.22-1~deb12u2: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.5.6-1~deb13u2: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.5.7-1~deb13u3: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.5.9-1~deb13u1: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
3.6.5-1: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
4.0.2-1: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]
4.0.3-1: [.dsc, use dget on this link to retrieve source package] [changelog] [copyright] [rules] [control]

binaries

libcrypto3-udeb
libssl-dev
libssl-doc
libssl3-udeb
libssl3t64
openssl (28 bugs: 0, 12, 16, 0)
openssl-provider-fips (1 bugs: 0, 1, 0, 0)
openssl-provider-legacy

action needed

Problems while searching for a new upstream version high

uscan had problems while searching for a new upstream version:

In debian/watch no matching files for watch source
  https://openssl-library.org/source/

Created: 2026-11-02 Last update: 2026-11-12 13:01

5 security issues in trixie high

There are 5 open security issues in trixie.

5 important issues:

CVE-2026-88822: Issue summary: QUIC, when performing automated peer detection, may allow uninitialized stack data to leak into the received address which is then used as the destination for outgoing packets. Impact summary: Applications using QUIC's automated peer detection mechanism may receive an invalid address, leading to connection loss and disclosure of uninitialized stack data to an attacker observing the outgoing network traffic. CWE: CWE-457 (Use of Uninitialized Variable) Description: The OpenSSL QUIC stack contains a feature in which, when using an already connected socket, it will auto-detect the peer address during the SSL handshake. This feature uses the getpeername() function, passing a buffer of sufficient length to hold any supported address family, but passes a buffer length that is only sized such that larger addresses, such as IPv6, cannot be retrieved. The getpeername() function however, still returns the full address length, which is accepted as the valid input buffer length, leading to the address buffer containing uninitialized stack data instead of the actual peer address. The invalid peer address is then used as destination for the outgoing packets which leads to a connectivity breakage and a leakage of the uninitialized stack data to passive network observers. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected protocol is not implemented in the FIPS module.
CVE-2026-88823: Issue summary: The AES-GCM-SIV implementation treats a zero-length Additional Authenticated Data (AAD) update as a reset of all the AAD supplied so far, instead of leaving the AAD unchanged. An application that supplies its AAD in several fragments, one of which is empty, therefore produces or verifies messages whose authentication tag does not cover the AAD supplied before the empty fragment. Impact summary: Data an application intended to authenticate alongside a message is silently left unauthenticated. An attacker can forge the AAD of such a message. CWE: CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step Description: An application passing AAD in multiple chunks of which some have zero length will have the previous AAD chunks effectively unauthenticated. Also, on context re-initialisation, the AAD was not reset, which meant that any AAD accumulated from the previous context usage were also included in the AAD of the new message. The fix makes a zero-length AAD update a no-op and clears any accumulated AAD whenever the context is re-initialised with a key or a nonce. A re-initialisation that only changes parameters keeps the AAD. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected, as AES-GCM-SIV is not a FIPS approved algorithm and is implemented only in the default provider, outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95691: Issue summary: A retransmitted QUIC CRYPTO frame can release packet storage while the TLS record layer retains a direct pointer into that storage causing use after free. Impact summary: A malicious QUIC server can cause a heap-use-after-free read in the OpenSSL QUIC client. The server can also identify one allocator-adjacent byte through the client's protected Handshake response. CWE: CWE-416: Use After Free Description: During CRYPTO stream processing, a pointer into the first frame's memory on the stream is lent to the TLS handshake processing. The memory must remain stable until it is processed and released. However the processing of retransmitted CRYPTO frames could release the memory if the retransmitted frame fully overlapped the existing frame. This then causes use-after-free read when the TLS handshake processing continues. The use-after-free read can lead to a Denial-of-Service of the client application or a minor leak of information about the heap memory contents that might be overwritten with other data, subsequently allocated by the application, to the peer. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95692: Issue summary: Setting an AES-GCM-SIV IV shorter than the expected nonce length via EVP_CipherInit_ex() may trigger a heap out-of-bounds read. Supplying a longer IV is silently truncated instead of rejected. Impact summary: An application passing a caller-supplied IV of the wrong length may crash or read beyond its buffer. Because trailing IV bytes are ignored, an attacker who knows one message and tag may forge messages under a different IV. CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read Description: AES-GCM-SIV copies the caller-supplied IV or nonce into its internal state using a copy whose length is taken from the expected nonce size rather than from the length the caller actually provided. When the caller passes a shorter IV, the copy reads past the end of the caller's buffer; AddressSanitizer confirms a heap out-of-bounds read reached through EVP_CipherInit_ex() into ossl_aes_gcm_siv_init(). When the caller passes a longer IV, the implementation silently discards the trailing bytes instead of rejecting the length. The truncation breaks the binding between the IV and the computed authentication tag. An attacker who has observed a message and its tag under one IV can produce a message and tag that verify under a different IV whose first bytes match, since the surplus bytes never influence the computation. The message itself is unchanged, so this is a failure of IV commitment rather than a classic existential forgery. Only applications that call EVP_CipherInit_ex() (or the equivalent provider cipher initialization) with an IV length other than the standard 12 bytes for AES-GCM-SIV are affected. The severity is limited because the out-of-bounds read is small and attacker-controlled only in length, and the forgery requires an unusual IV length choice by the application. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as AES-GCM-SIV is not an approved algorithm.
CVE-2026-107496: Issue summary: Encrypting a CMS message to an EC certificate whose group order is 1 may cause CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() to loop indefinitely. Impact summary: An attacker able to supply the recipient certificate to an application performing CMS encryption can cause that application to loop indefinitely, consuming CPU and resulting in Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-835: Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop') Description: CMS_encrypt() and CMS_encrypt_ex() encrypt a message to one or more recipient certificates and, for an EC recipient, generate an ephemeral key in the recipient's group. If the certificate declares a group order of 1, random scalar generation can only produce zero. The key generation routine then retries without limit while waiting for a nonzero private scalar, so the call never returns. The OpenSSL TLS and QUIC implementations do not use this path. An application is exposed only if it calls CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() with a recipient certificate whose EC parameters are attacker-controlled. Certificates with normal EC group orders do not trigger the loop. OpenSSL 4.0 and later reject unknown explicit EC groups in default builds. These versions are affected only when configured with the enable-ec_explicit_curves option. The result is a hang that consumes a CPU core until the process is interrupted, a Denial of Service. The severity is Low because the attacker must supply the recipient certificate and the application must choose to encrypt to it; ordinary CMS encryption to trusted recipients is unaffected. The fix makes EC key generation fail when the group has no valid nonzero private scalar, instead of retrying indefinitely. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.1, 4.0, 3.5 and 3.0 are not affected. The FIPS provider does not support arbitrary explicit EC domain parameters, so an order-1 group is rejected during key import before the vulnerable key generation path is reached.

Created: 2026-11-10 Last update: 2026-11-11 05:31

5 security issues in sid high

There are 5 open security issues in sid.

5 important issues:

CVE-2026-88822: Issue summary: QUIC, when performing automated peer detection, may allow uninitialized stack data to leak into the received address which is then used as the destination for outgoing packets. Impact summary: Applications using QUIC's automated peer detection mechanism may receive an invalid address, leading to connection loss and disclosure of uninitialized stack data to an attacker observing the outgoing network traffic. CWE: CWE-457 (Use of Uninitialized Variable) Description: The OpenSSL QUIC stack contains a feature in which, when using an already connected socket, it will auto-detect the peer address during the SSL handshake. This feature uses the getpeername() function, passing a buffer of sufficient length to hold any supported address family, but passes a buffer length that is only sized such that larger addresses, such as IPv6, cannot be retrieved. The getpeername() function however, still returns the full address length, which is accepted as the valid input buffer length, leading to the address buffer containing uninitialized stack data instead of the actual peer address. The invalid peer address is then used as destination for the outgoing packets which leads to a connectivity breakage and a leakage of the uninitialized stack data to passive network observers. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected protocol is not implemented in the FIPS module.
CVE-2026-88823: Issue summary: The AES-GCM-SIV implementation treats a zero-length Additional Authenticated Data (AAD) update as a reset of all the AAD supplied so far, instead of leaving the AAD unchanged. An application that supplies its AAD in several fragments, one of which is empty, therefore produces or verifies messages whose authentication tag does not cover the AAD supplied before the empty fragment. Impact summary: Data an application intended to authenticate alongside a message is silently left unauthenticated. An attacker can forge the AAD of such a message. CWE: CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step Description: An application passing AAD in multiple chunks of which some have zero length will have the previous AAD chunks effectively unauthenticated. Also, on context re-initialisation, the AAD was not reset, which meant that any AAD accumulated from the previous context usage were also included in the AAD of the new message. The fix makes a zero-length AAD update a no-op and clears any accumulated AAD whenever the context is re-initialised with a key or a nonce. A re-initialisation that only changes parameters keeps the AAD. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected, as AES-GCM-SIV is not a FIPS approved algorithm and is implemented only in the default provider, outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95691: Issue summary: A retransmitted QUIC CRYPTO frame can release packet storage while the TLS record layer retains a direct pointer into that storage causing use after free. Impact summary: A malicious QUIC server can cause a heap-use-after-free read in the OpenSSL QUIC client. The server can also identify one allocator-adjacent byte through the client's protected Handshake response. CWE: CWE-416: Use After Free Description: During CRYPTO stream processing, a pointer into the first frame's memory on the stream is lent to the TLS handshake processing. The memory must remain stable until it is processed and released. However the processing of retransmitted CRYPTO frames could release the memory if the retransmitted frame fully overlapped the existing frame. This then causes use-after-free read when the TLS handshake processing continues. The use-after-free read can lead to a Denial-of-Service of the client application or a minor leak of information about the heap memory contents that might be overwritten with other data, subsequently allocated by the application, to the peer. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95692: Issue summary: Setting an AES-GCM-SIV IV shorter than the expected nonce length via EVP_CipherInit_ex() may trigger a heap out-of-bounds read. Supplying a longer IV is silently truncated instead of rejected. Impact summary: An application passing a caller-supplied IV of the wrong length may crash or read beyond its buffer. Because trailing IV bytes are ignored, an attacker who knows one message and tag may forge messages under a different IV. CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read Description: AES-GCM-SIV copies the caller-supplied IV or nonce into its internal state using a copy whose length is taken from the expected nonce size rather than from the length the caller actually provided. When the caller passes a shorter IV, the copy reads past the end of the caller's buffer; AddressSanitizer confirms a heap out-of-bounds read reached through EVP_CipherInit_ex() into ossl_aes_gcm_siv_init(). When the caller passes a longer IV, the implementation silently discards the trailing bytes instead of rejecting the length. The truncation breaks the binding between the IV and the computed authentication tag. An attacker who has observed a message and its tag under one IV can produce a message and tag that verify under a different IV whose first bytes match, since the surplus bytes never influence the computation. The message itself is unchanged, so this is a failure of IV commitment rather than a classic existential forgery. Only applications that call EVP_CipherInit_ex() (or the equivalent provider cipher initialization) with an IV length other than the standard 12 bytes for AES-GCM-SIV are affected. The severity is limited because the out-of-bounds read is small and attacker-controlled only in length, and the forgery requires an unusual IV length choice by the application. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as AES-GCM-SIV is not an approved algorithm.
CVE-2026-107496: Issue summary: Encrypting a CMS message to an EC certificate whose group order is 1 may cause CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() to loop indefinitely. Impact summary: An attacker able to supply the recipient certificate to an application performing CMS encryption can cause that application to loop indefinitely, consuming CPU and resulting in Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-835: Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop') Description: CMS_encrypt() and CMS_encrypt_ex() encrypt a message to one or more recipient certificates and, for an EC recipient, generate an ephemeral key in the recipient's group. If the certificate declares a group order of 1, random scalar generation can only produce zero. The key generation routine then retries without limit while waiting for a nonzero private scalar, so the call never returns. The OpenSSL TLS and QUIC implementations do not use this path. An application is exposed only if it calls CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() with a recipient certificate whose EC parameters are attacker-controlled. Certificates with normal EC group orders do not trigger the loop. OpenSSL 4.0 and later reject unknown explicit EC groups in default builds. These versions are affected only when configured with the enable-ec_explicit_curves option. The result is a hang that consumes a CPU core until the process is interrupted, a Denial of Service. The severity is Low because the attacker must supply the recipient certificate and the application must choose to encrypt to it; ordinary CMS encryption to trusted recipients is unaffected. The fix makes EC key generation fail when the group has no valid nonzero private scalar, instead of retrying indefinitely. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.1, 4.0, 3.5 and 3.0 are not affected. The FIPS provider does not support arbitrary explicit EC domain parameters, so an order-1 group is rejected during key import before the vulnerable key generation path is reached.

Created: 2026-11-10 Last update: 2026-11-11 05:31

5 security issues in forky high

There are 5 open security issues in forky.

5 important issues:

CVE-2026-88822: Issue summary: QUIC, when performing automated peer detection, may allow uninitialized stack data to leak into the received address which is then used as the destination for outgoing packets. Impact summary: Applications using QUIC's automated peer detection mechanism may receive an invalid address, leading to connection loss and disclosure of uninitialized stack data to an attacker observing the outgoing network traffic. CWE: CWE-457 (Use of Uninitialized Variable) Description: The OpenSSL QUIC stack contains a feature in which, when using an already connected socket, it will auto-detect the peer address during the SSL handshake. This feature uses the getpeername() function, passing a buffer of sufficient length to hold any supported address family, but passes a buffer length that is only sized such that larger addresses, such as IPv6, cannot be retrieved. The getpeername() function however, still returns the full address length, which is accepted as the valid input buffer length, leading to the address buffer containing uninitialized stack data instead of the actual peer address. The invalid peer address is then used as destination for the outgoing packets which leads to a connectivity breakage and a leakage of the uninitialized stack data to passive network observers. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected protocol is not implemented in the FIPS module.
CVE-2026-88823: Issue summary: The AES-GCM-SIV implementation treats a zero-length Additional Authenticated Data (AAD) update as a reset of all the AAD supplied so far, instead of leaving the AAD unchanged. An application that supplies its AAD in several fragments, one of which is empty, therefore produces or verifies messages whose authentication tag does not cover the AAD supplied before the empty fragment. Impact summary: Data an application intended to authenticate alongside a message is silently left unauthenticated. An attacker can forge the AAD of such a message. CWE: CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step Description: An application passing AAD in multiple chunks of which some have zero length will have the previous AAD chunks effectively unauthenticated. Also, on context re-initialisation, the AAD was not reset, which meant that any AAD accumulated from the previous context usage were also included in the AAD of the new message. The fix makes a zero-length AAD update a no-op and clears any accumulated AAD whenever the context is re-initialised with a key or a nonce. A re-initialisation that only changes parameters keeps the AAD. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected, as AES-GCM-SIV is not a FIPS approved algorithm and is implemented only in the default provider, outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95691: Issue summary: A retransmitted QUIC CRYPTO frame can release packet storage while the TLS record layer retains a direct pointer into that storage causing use after free. Impact summary: A malicious QUIC server can cause a heap-use-after-free read in the OpenSSL QUIC client. The server can also identify one allocator-adjacent byte through the client's protected Handshake response. CWE: CWE-416: Use After Free Description: During CRYPTO stream processing, a pointer into the first frame's memory on the stream is lent to the TLS handshake processing. The memory must remain stable until it is processed and released. However the processing of retransmitted CRYPTO frames could release the memory if the retransmitted frame fully overlapped the existing frame. This then causes use-after-free read when the TLS handshake processing continues. The use-after-free read can lead to a Denial-of-Service of the client application or a minor leak of information about the heap memory contents that might be overwritten with other data, subsequently allocated by the application, to the peer. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95692: Issue summary: Setting an AES-GCM-SIV IV shorter than the expected nonce length via EVP_CipherInit_ex() may trigger a heap out-of-bounds read. Supplying a longer IV is silently truncated instead of rejected. Impact summary: An application passing a caller-supplied IV of the wrong length may crash or read beyond its buffer. Because trailing IV bytes are ignored, an attacker who knows one message and tag may forge messages under a different IV. CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read Description: AES-GCM-SIV copies the caller-supplied IV or nonce into its internal state using a copy whose length is taken from the expected nonce size rather than from the length the caller actually provided. When the caller passes a shorter IV, the copy reads past the end of the caller's buffer; AddressSanitizer confirms a heap out-of-bounds read reached through EVP_CipherInit_ex() into ossl_aes_gcm_siv_init(). When the caller passes a longer IV, the implementation silently discards the trailing bytes instead of rejecting the length. The truncation breaks the binding between the IV and the computed authentication tag. An attacker who has observed a message and its tag under one IV can produce a message and tag that verify under a different IV whose first bytes match, since the surplus bytes never influence the computation. The message itself is unchanged, so this is a failure of IV commitment rather than a classic existential forgery. Only applications that call EVP_CipherInit_ex() (or the equivalent provider cipher initialization) with an IV length other than the standard 12 bytes for AES-GCM-SIV are affected. The severity is limited because the out-of-bounds read is small and attacker-controlled only in length, and the forgery requires an unusual IV length choice by the application. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as AES-GCM-SIV is not an approved algorithm.
CVE-2026-107496: Issue summary: Encrypting a CMS message to an EC certificate whose group order is 1 may cause CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() to loop indefinitely. Impact summary: An attacker able to supply the recipient certificate to an application performing CMS encryption can cause that application to loop indefinitely, consuming CPU and resulting in Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-835: Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop') Description: CMS_encrypt() and CMS_encrypt_ex() encrypt a message to one or more recipient certificates and, for an EC recipient, generate an ephemeral key in the recipient's group. If the certificate declares a group order of 1, random scalar generation can only produce zero. The key generation routine then retries without limit while waiting for a nonzero private scalar, so the call never returns. The OpenSSL TLS and QUIC implementations do not use this path. An application is exposed only if it calls CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() with a recipient certificate whose EC parameters are attacker-controlled. Certificates with normal EC group orders do not trigger the loop. OpenSSL 4.0 and later reject unknown explicit EC groups in default builds. These versions are affected only when configured with the enable-ec_explicit_curves option. The result is a hang that consumes a CPU core until the process is interrupted, a Denial of Service. The severity is Low because the attacker must supply the recipient certificate and the application must choose to encrypt to it; ordinary CMS encryption to trusted recipients is unaffected. The fix makes EC key generation fail when the group has no valid nonzero private scalar, instead of retrying indefinitely. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.1, 4.0, 3.5 and 3.0 are not affected. The FIPS provider does not support arbitrary explicit EC domain parameters, so an order-1 group is rejected during key import before the vulnerable key generation path is reached.

Created: 2026-11-10 Last update: 2026-11-11 05:31

5 security issues in bookworm high

There are 5 open security issues in bookworm.

5 important issues:

CVE-2026-88822: Issue summary: QUIC, when performing automated peer detection, may allow uninitialized stack data to leak into the received address which is then used as the destination for outgoing packets. Impact summary: Applications using QUIC's automated peer detection mechanism may receive an invalid address, leading to connection loss and disclosure of uninitialized stack data to an attacker observing the outgoing network traffic. CWE: CWE-457 (Use of Uninitialized Variable) Description: The OpenSSL QUIC stack contains a feature in which, when using an already connected socket, it will auto-detect the peer address during the SSL handshake. This feature uses the getpeername() function, passing a buffer of sufficient length to hold any supported address family, but passes a buffer length that is only sized such that larger addresses, such as IPv6, cannot be retrieved. The getpeername() function however, still returns the full address length, which is accepted as the valid input buffer length, leading to the address buffer containing uninitialized stack data instead of the actual peer address. The invalid peer address is then used as destination for the outgoing packets which leads to a connectivity breakage and a leakage of the uninitialized stack data to passive network observers. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected protocol is not implemented in the FIPS module.
CVE-2026-88823: Issue summary: The AES-GCM-SIV implementation treats a zero-length Additional Authenticated Data (AAD) update as a reset of all the AAD supplied so far, instead of leaving the AAD unchanged. An application that supplies its AAD in several fragments, one of which is empty, therefore produces or verifies messages whose authentication tag does not cover the AAD supplied before the empty fragment. Impact summary: Data an application intended to authenticate alongside a message is silently left unauthenticated. An attacker can forge the AAD of such a message. CWE: CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step Description: An application passing AAD in multiple chunks of which some have zero length will have the previous AAD chunks effectively unauthenticated. Also, on context re-initialisation, the AAD was not reset, which meant that any AAD accumulated from the previous context usage were also included in the AAD of the new message. The fix makes a zero-length AAD update a no-op and clears any accumulated AAD whenever the context is re-initialised with a key or a nonce. A re-initialisation that only changes parameters keeps the AAD. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected, as AES-GCM-SIV is not a FIPS approved algorithm and is implemented only in the default provider, outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95691: Issue summary: A retransmitted QUIC CRYPTO frame can release packet storage while the TLS record layer retains a direct pointer into that storage causing use after free. Impact summary: A malicious QUIC server can cause a heap-use-after-free read in the OpenSSL QUIC client. The server can also identify one allocator-adjacent byte through the client's protected Handshake response. CWE: CWE-416: Use After Free Description: During CRYPTO stream processing, a pointer into the first frame's memory on the stream is lent to the TLS handshake processing. The memory must remain stable until it is processed and released. However the processing of retransmitted CRYPTO frames could release the memory if the retransmitted frame fully overlapped the existing frame. This then causes use-after-free read when the TLS handshake processing continues. The use-after-free read can lead to a Denial-of-Service of the client application or a minor leak of information about the heap memory contents that might be overwritten with other data, subsequently allocated by the application, to the peer. FIPS impact: no The FIPS module is not affected as the QUIC implementation is outside of the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.
CVE-2026-95692: Issue summary: Setting an AES-GCM-SIV IV shorter than the expected nonce length via EVP_CipherInit_ex() may trigger a heap out-of-bounds read. Supplying a longer IV is silently truncated instead of rejected. Impact summary: An application passing a caller-supplied IV of the wrong length may crash or read beyond its buffer. Because trailing IV bytes are ignored, an attacker who knows one message and tag may forge messages under a different IV. CWE: CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read Description: AES-GCM-SIV copies the caller-supplied IV or nonce into its internal state using a copy whose length is taken from the expected nonce size rather than from the length the caller actually provided. When the caller passes a shorter IV, the copy reads past the end of the caller's buffer; AddressSanitizer confirms a heap out-of-bounds read reached through EVP_CipherInit_ex() into ossl_aes_gcm_siv_init(). When the caller passes a longer IV, the implementation silently discards the trailing bytes instead of rejecting the length. The truncation breaks the binding between the IV and the computed authentication tag. An attacker who has observed a message and its tag under one IV can produce a message and tag that verify under a different IV whose first bytes match, since the surplus bytes never influence the computation. The message itself is unchanged, so this is a failure of IV commitment rather than a classic existential forgery. Only applications that call EVP_CipherInit_ex() (or the equivalent provider cipher initialization) with an IV length other than the standard 12 bytes for AES-GCM-SIV are affected. The severity is limited because the out-of-bounds read is small and attacker-controlled only in length, and the forgery requires an unusual IV length choice by the application. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules are not affected by this issue, as AES-GCM-SIV is not an approved algorithm.
CVE-2026-107496: Issue summary: Encrypting a CMS message to an EC certificate whose group order is 1 may cause CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() to loop indefinitely. Impact summary: An attacker able to supply the recipient certificate to an application performing CMS encryption can cause that application to loop indefinitely, consuming CPU and resulting in Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-835: Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop') Description: CMS_encrypt() and CMS_encrypt_ex() encrypt a message to one or more recipient certificates and, for an EC recipient, generate an ephemeral key in the recipient's group. If the certificate declares a group order of 1, random scalar generation can only produce zero. The key generation routine then retries without limit while waiting for a nonzero private scalar, so the call never returns. The OpenSSL TLS and QUIC implementations do not use this path. An application is exposed only if it calls CMS_encrypt() or CMS_encrypt_ex() with a recipient certificate whose EC parameters are attacker-controlled. Certificates with normal EC group orders do not trigger the loop. OpenSSL 4.0 and later reject unknown explicit EC groups in default builds. These versions are affected only when configured with the enable-ec_explicit_curves option. The result is a hang that consumes a CPU core until the process is interrupted, a Denial of Service. The severity is Low because the attacker must supply the recipient certificate and the application must choose to encrypt to it; ordinary CMS encryption to trusted recipients is unaffected. The fix makes EC key generation fail when the group has no valid nonzero private scalar, instead of retrying indefinitely. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.1, 4.0, 3.5 and 3.0 are not affected. The FIPS provider does not support arbitrary explicit EC domain parameters, so an order-1 group is rejected during key import before the vulnerable key generation path is reached.

Created: 2026-11-10 Last update: 2026-11-11 05:31

The VCS repository is not up to date, push the missing commits. high

vcswatch reports that the current version of the package is not in its VCS.
Either you need to push your commits and/or your tags, or the information about the package's VCS are out of date. A common cause of the latter issue when using the Git VCS is not specifying the correct branch when the packaging is not in the default one (remote HEAD branch), which is usually "master" but can be modified in salsa.debian.org in the project's general settings with the "Default Branch" field). Alternatively the Vcs-Git field in debian/control can contain a "-b <branch-name>" suffix to indicate what branch is used for the Debian packaging.

Created: 2026-03-14 Last update: 2026-11-08 13:02

5 security issues in bullseye high

There are 5 open security issues in bullseye.

5 important issues:

CVE-2026-54874: Issue summary: Receiving a DTLS record for a future epoch while a handshake is in progress causes OpenSSL to buffer far more memory than the record itself requires. Impact summary: A peer can use a small amount of network traffic to make an OpenSSL DTLS endpoint retain a disproportionately large amount of memory, which may lead to a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-405: Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification) Description: While a DTLS handshake is in progress, a peer may legitimately have already moved on to the next epoch (for example, having sent its ChangeCipherSpec and Finished messages) before the local endpoint has processed the same transition, typically because of reordering on the underlying UDP transport. OpenSSL buffers such early records so that they can be processed once the local endpoint catches up. Buffering a record currently retains the entire read buffer it arrived in, which is sized to hold the largest possible DTLS record (around 16 kilobytes), rather than just the bytes that make up the record itself. Up to 100 such records may be buffered per connection. As a result, a peer that sends a stream of small forged records claiming to belong to the next epoch can cause an OpenSSL DTLS endpoint to retain around 1.7 megabytes of memory, despite sending only a small fraction of that amount of data over the network. An attacker therefore gains a memory amplification factor of around 1200, and can multiply the effect across as many associations as it is able to open, making this a remote memory exhaustion Denial of Service risk for DTLS servers. Since the memory retained per connection remains bounded, and any limit an application already places on the number of concurrent associations also bounds the total exposure, this issue has been assessed as Low severity. FIPS impact: no No FIPS modules are affected by this issue as the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary. OpenSSL 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.0, 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL 4.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 4.0.2. OpenSSL 3.6 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.6.4. OpenSSL 3.5 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.5.8. OpenSSL 3.4 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.4.7. OpenSSL 3.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.0.22. Premium support customers only: OpenSSL 1.1.1 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1zi OpenSSL 1.0.2 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.2zr This issue was reported on 18 May 2026 by Amazon Web Services. The fix has been developed by Matt Caswell. -- cut (non-publishing metadata for internal use) -- Reported by: Amazon Web Services Fixed by: Matt Caswell
CVE-2026-63072: Issue summary: OpenSSL CMS decryption sizes the key-unwrap output buffer based on querying the unwrapped key size, but the AES-WRAP-PAD unwrap primitive can write and cleanse more bytes than that query reports, causing an 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write. Impact summary: An attacker who supplies a crafted CMS message can trigger a deterministic 8-byte out-of-bounds heap write when the victim decrypts it with CMS_decrypt(), corrupting the heap and typically resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write Description: The key-wrap OID is potentially attacker-controlled on the wire. CMS unwrapping allows both id-aesNNN-wrap-pad and id-aesNNN-wrap ciphers. An attacker can take a legitimate message and change a single OID byte to select the padded variant while leaving the message otherwise valid. Since the unwrap key is derived from the recipient's private operation (ECDH key agreement or ML-KEM decapsulation), the RFC 5649 integrity check cannot pass, and the decryption fails with integrity failure. The write is a fixed-size (8-byte), fixed-value (zero) heap overflow immediately past the allocation, requires no special configuration, and is reachable from the public CMS_decrypt() function. The consequence is a heap corruption leading to a Denial of Service. The fix in the CMS code sizes the unwrap output buffer for the worst case so a failed unwrap cannot write past the allocation. FIPS impact: no As the CMS code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.
CVE-2026-63074: Issue summary: The OpenSSL Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) caches additional certificates (extraCerts) sent in a CMP message, but never expunges them (for instance if they are invalid). If a server reuses an OSSL_CMP_CTX frequently, this cache of extraCerts may grow unboundedly, and a malicious client may flood a CMP server with requests driving this growth. Impact summary: Users utilizing a CMP server that reuses a single OSSL_CMP_CTX for the lifetime of a server process may observe unbounded memory growth in the event a malicious client repeatedly sends requests containing unique extra certificates, which may lead to OOM conditions. CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling Description: If a remote user sends CMP messages to a server with a list of extraCerts and the message is rejected, the extraCerts from the message remains in the server contexts untrusted certificate stack. This exposes servers with long lived ctx objects to Denial of Service attacks in which an attacker sends messages intending to be rejected with a large list of additional certificates repeatedly, forcing the server to store them indefinitely. The issue was fixed by removing the added extra certs if the message is rejected, using the same method as when the context is configured to not do caching at all. FIPS impact: no As the CMP code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.
CVE-2026-63076: Issue summary: OpenSSL CMP password based protection verification only checks whether the protectionAlg parameter was not NULL and not its ASN.1 type, before treating it as a PBMParameter. A crafted message can contain a parameter of a different type, which is then dereferenced as an invalid pointer. Impact summary: A remote, unauthenticated attacker can crash an application acting as a CMP server that accepts PBM-protected messages, or a CMP client talking to a malicious or intercepted CMP server, resulting in a Denial of Service. CWE: CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference Description: When verifying the password-based MAC protection of a CMP message, OpenSSL library reads the protectionAlg algorithm parameter with X509_ALGOR_get0(), which returns both the parameter type and its value pointer. The value is then cast to an ASN1_STRING and treated as the expected PBMParameter after only checking that pointer is not NULL. The parameter type returned by X509_ALGOR_get0() was never consulted. This happens during protection verification, before any MAC is computed, so no knowledge of the PBM shared secret is required; the only precondition is that PBM verification is reachable. On the server side this is reached from OSSL_CMP_SRV_process_request() for any application that stands up a CMP server accepting PBM-protected messages, and on the client side from CMP response validation against a malicious or on-path (MITM) server. The reliable consequence is a denial of service; there is no memory disclosure, no controlled memory write, and no path to code execution. CMP is a specialized feature that an application must explicitly enable. FIPS impact: no As the CMP code lives outside the FIPS module boundary, no FIPS modules are affected by this CVE.
CVE-2026-75803: Issue summary: ChaCha20-Poly1305 and AES-OCB decryption with an empty ciphertext can report success without verifying the supplied authentication tag when the operation is finalized by calling the EVP_Cipher() function. Impact summary: Applications calling EVP_Cipher() on an empty ciphertext and expecting the call to check the AEAD tag may accept forged messages. CWE: CWE-354 (Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value) Description: The EVP_Cipher() API call for AEAD ciphers behaves like a one shot encryption and decryption call. It also verifies the AEAD tag after the decryption operation. However for AES-OCB and ChaCha20-Poly1305 ciphers it skipped the AEAD tag verification when an empty ciphertext was passed to the function. The callers of this function might believe that a successful return indicates a valid AEAD tag for these ciphers, even when that has not truly been validated in this case. FIPS impact: no The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this CVE as the affected algorithms are not FIPS approved and thus not implemented in the FIPS module.

Created: 2026-08-17 Last update: 2026-08-27 11:00

5 security issues in buster high

There are 5 open security issues in buster.

1 important issue:

CVE-2024-5535: Issue summary: Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto with an empty supported client protocols buffer may cause a crash or memory contents to be sent to the peer. Impact summary: A buffer overread can have a range of potential consequences such as unexpected application beahviour or a crash. In particular this issue could result in up to 255 bytes of arbitrary private data from memory being sent to the peer leading to a loss of confidentiality. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_select_next_proto function with a 0 length list of supported client protocols are affected by this issue. This would normally never be a valid scenario and is typically not under attacker control but may occur by accident in the case of a configuration or programming error in the calling application. The OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto is typically used by TLS applications that support ALPN (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation) or NPN (Next Protocol Negotiation). NPN is older, was never standardised and is deprecated in favour of ALPN. We believe that ALPN is significantly more widely deployed than NPN. The SSL_select_next_proto function accepts a list of protocols from the server and a list of protocols from the client and returns the first protocol that appears in the server list that also appears in the client list. In the case of no overlap between the two lists it returns the first item in the client list. In either case it will signal whether an overlap between the two lists was found. In the case where SSL_select_next_proto is called with a zero length client list it fails to notice this condition and returns the memory immediately following the client list pointer (and reports that there was no overlap in the lists). This function is typically called from a server side application callback for ALPN or a client side application callback for NPN. In the case of ALPN the list of protocols supplied by the client is guaranteed by libssl to never be zero in length. The list of server protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. In this case if the SSL_select_next_proto function has been called as expected (with the list supplied by the client passed in the client/client_len parameters), then the application will not be vulnerable to this issue. If the application has accidentally been configured with a zero length server list, and has accidentally passed that zero length server list in the client/client_len parameters, and has additionally failed to correctly handle a "no overlap" response (which would normally result in a handshake failure in ALPN) then it will be vulnerable to this problem. In the case of NPN, the protocol permits the client to opportunistically select a protocol when there is no overlap. OpenSSL returns the first client protocol in the no overlap case in support of this. The list of client protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. However if the SSL_select_next_proto function is accidentally called with a client_len of 0 then an invalid memory pointer will be returned instead. If the application uses this output as the opportunistic protocol then the loss of confidentiality will occur. This issue has been assessed as Low severity because applications are most likely to be vulnerable if they are using NPN instead of ALPN - but NPN is not widely used. It also requires an application configuration or programming error. Finally, this issue would not typically be under attacker control making active exploitation unlikely. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. Due to the low severity of this issue we are not issuing new releases of OpenSSL at this time. The fix will be included in the next releases when they become available.

4 issues postponed or untriaged:

CVE-2023-5678: (postponed; to be fixed through a stable update) Issue summary: Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 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. While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817), DH_check_pub_key() doesn't make any of these checks, and is therefore vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters. Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large P, it doesn't check for an excessively large Q. An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also 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_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the "-pubcheck" option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application. 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.
CVE-2024-0727: (postponed; to be fixed through a stable update) Issue summary: Processing a maliciously formatted PKCS12 file may lead OpenSSL to crash leading to a potential Denial of Service attack Impact summary: Applications loading files in the PKCS12 format from untrusted sources might terminate abruptly. A file in PKCS12 format can contain certificates and keys and may come from an untrusted source. The PKCS12 specification allows certain fields to be NULL, but OpenSSL does not correctly check for this case. This can lead to a NULL pointer dereference that results in OpenSSL crashing. If an application processes PKCS12 files from an untrusted source using the OpenSSL APIs then that application will be vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL APIs that are vulnerable to this are: PKCS12_parse(), PKCS12_unpack_p7data(), PKCS12_unpack_p7encdata(), PKCS12_unpack_authsafes() and PKCS12_newpass(). We have also fixed a similar issue in SMIME_write_PKCS7(). However since this function is related to writing data we do not consider it security significant. The FIPS modules in 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.
CVE-2024-2511: (postponed; to be fixed through a stable update) Issue summary: Some non-default TLS server configurations can cause unbounded memory growth when processing TLSv1.3 sessions Impact summary: An attacker may exploit certain server configurations to trigger unbounded memory growth that would lead to a Denial of Service This problem can occur in TLSv1.3 if the non-default SSL_OP_NO_TICKET option is being used (but not if early_data support is also configured and the default anti-replay protection is in use). In this case, under certain conditions, the session cache can get into an incorrect state and it will fail to flush properly as it fills. The session cache will continue to grow in an unbounded manner. A malicious client could deliberately create the scenario for this failure to force a Denial of Service. It may also happen by accident in normal operation. This issue only affects TLS servers supporting TLSv1.3. It does not affect TLS clients. The FIPS modules in 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is also not affected by this issue.
CVE-2024-4741: (postponed; to be fixed through a stable update)

Created: 2024-06-27 Last update: 2024-06-29 19:18

1 bug with a patch to review in the bug tracker normal

The bug tracker contains patches fixing 1 bug to review: include them, or remove the patch tag.

Created: 2026-09-02 Last update: 2026-11-12 17:00

lintian reports 6 warnings normal

Lintian reports 6 warnings about this package. You should make the package lintian clean getting rid of them.

Created: 2026-06-14 Last update: 2026-09-30 12:00

RFH: The maintainer is looking for help with this package. normal

The current maintainer is looking for someone who can help with the maintenance of this package. If you are interested in this package, please consider helping out. One way you can help is offer to be a co-maintainer or triage bugs in the BTS. Please see bug number #332498 for more information.

Created: 2017-12-02 Last update: 2017-12-02 00:26

debian/patches: 3 patches to forward upstream low

Among the 3 debian patches available in version 3.6.5-1 of the package, we noticed the following issues:

3 patches where the metadata indicates that the patch has not yet been forwarded upstream. You should either forward the patch upstream or update the metadata to document its real status.

Created: 2023-02-26 Last update: 2026-09-30 08:00

Standards version of the package is outdated. wishlist

The package should be updated to follow the last version of Debian Policy (Standards-Version 4.7.4 instead of 4.7.2).

Created: 2025-12-23 Last update: 2026-09-30 07:31

testing migrations

This package will soon be part of the auto-openssl transition. You might want to ensure that your package is ready for it. You can probably find supplementary information in the debian-release archives or in the corresponding release.debian.org bug.

news

[rss feed]

[2026-11-06] Accepted openssl 3.5.9-1~deb13u1 (source) into proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-10-26] Accepted openssl 3.0.22-1~deb12u2 (source) into oldstable-security (Arnaud Rebillout)
[2026-10-09] openssl 3.6.5-1 MIGRATED to testing (Debian testing watch)
[2026-10-02] Accepted openssl 3.5.7-1~deb13u3 (source) into proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-09-30] Accepted openssl 3.5.7-1~deb13u3 (source) into stable-security (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-09-29] Accepted openssl 4.0.3-1 (source) into experimental (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-09-29] Accepted openssl 3.6.5-1 (source) into unstable (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-09-25] Accepted openssl 3.0.22-1~deb12u1 (source) into oldstable-security (Arnaud Rebillout)
[2026-09-14] openssl 3.6.4-1 MIGRATED to testing (Debian testing watch)
[2026-08-26] Accepted openssl 3.5.7-1~deb13u1 (source) into proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-08-26] Accepted openssl 3.5.7-1~deb13u2 (source) into proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-08-25] Accepted openssl 4.0.2-1 (source) into experimental (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-08-25] Accepted openssl 3.6.4-1 (source) into unstable (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-08-25] Accepted openssl 3.5.7-1~deb13u2 (source) into stable-security (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-16] openssl 3.6.3-1 MIGRATED to testing (Debian testing watch)
[2026-06-15] Accepted openssl 1.1.1w-0+deb11u8 (source) into oldoldstable-security (Arnaud Rebillout)
[2026-06-13] Accepted openssl 4.0.1-1 (source amd64) into experimental (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-13] Accepted openssl 3.6.3-1 (source) into unstable (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-11] Accepted openssl 3.0.20-1~deb12u2 (source) into oldstable-proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-11] Accepted openssl 3.5.6-1~deb13u2 (source) into proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-09] Accepted openssl 3.5.6-1~deb13u2 (source) into stable-security (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-09] Accepted openssl 3.0.20-1~deb12u2 (source) into oldstable-security (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-06-09] Accepted openssl 1.1.1w-0+deb11u7 (source) into oldoldstable-security (Arnaud Rebillout)
[2026-06-09] Accepted openssl 1.1.1w-0+deb11u6 (source) into oldoldstable-security (Arnaud Rebillout)
[2026-05-05] Accepted openssl 3.0.20-1~deb12u1 (source) into oldstable-proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-05-05] Accepted openssl 3.5.6-1~deb13u1 (source) into proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-04-20] openssl 3.6.2-1 MIGRATED to testing (Debian testing watch)
[2026-04-17] Accepted openssl 4.0.0-1 (source amd64 all) into experimental (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-04-11] Accepted openssl 3.6.2-1 (source) into unstable (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
[2026-04-08] Accepted openssl 3.0.19-1~deb12u2 (source) into oldstable-proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)

bugs [bug history graph]

all: 31
RC: 0
I&N: 14
M&W: 17
F&P: 0
patch: 1

links

homepage
lintian (0, 6)
buildd: logs, exp, reproducibility, cross
popcon
browse source code
other distros
security tracker
screenshots
debian patches
debci

ubuntu

[Information about Ubuntu for Debian Developers]

version: 4.0.3-1ubuntu1
33 bugs (1 patch)