VulnerabilityPublished 2 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-34610: smuellerDD leancrypto · Incorrect Conversion Between Numeric Types

Affects smuellerDD leancryptoSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium : upgrade to 1.7.1 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.7.1

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Apr 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade leancrypto and smuellerdd/leancrypto to 1.7.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
smuellerDDleancrypto	Affected <1.7.1	Fixed in 1.7.1
GitHubsmuellerdd/leancrypto`pkg:github/smuellerdd/leancrypto`Other threats	Affected <1.7.1	Fixed in 1.7.1

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Upgrade leancrypto to version 1.7.1 or later, where the vulnerability has been patched. No other mitigations are indicated or necessary as the fix addresses the root cause of the numeric truncation.

Description

The leancrypto library is a cryptographic library that exclusively contains only PQC-resistant cryptographic algorithms. Prior to version 1.7.1, lc_x509_extract_name_segment() casts size_t vlen to uint8_t when storing the Common Name (CN) length. An attacker who crafts a certificate with CN = victim's CN + 256 bytes padding gets cn_size = (uint8_t)(256 + N) = N, where N is the victim's CN length. The first N bytes of the attacker's CN are the victim's identity. After parsing, the attacker's certificate has an identical CN to the victim's — enabling identity impersonation in PKCS#7 verification, certificate chain matching, and code signing. This issue has been patched in version 1.7.1.

Impact

An attacker can impersonate a victim's identity by crafting a certificate that appears to have the same Common Name as the victim due to the numeric truncation bug. This can lead to bypassing identity checks in PKCS#7 signature verification, certificate chain matching, and code signing processes, potentially allowing unauthorized code execution or trust misattribution. There is no indication of availability impact or confidentiality loss. No known exploits are reported in the wild.

CWE-681Incorrect Conversion between Numeric Types (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
When converting from one data type to another, such as long to integer, data can be omitted or translated in a way that produces unexpected values. If the resulting values are used in a sensitive context, then dangerous behaviors may occur.
Implementation
Avoid making conversion between numeric types. Always check for the allowed ranges.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Apr 2026, 22:43 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-681

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats