Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV

GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h openssl-encrypt

Fix: jahlives/openssl_encrypt@05e45f3

GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h is a CWE-639 vulnerability in openssl-encrypt. A fix is available for openssl-encrypt — see the affected versions and patch details below.

openssl-encrypt has no owner verification on key revocation — any client can revoke any key

Also known asCVE-2026-74877PYSEC-2026-3743
Published
Apr 1, 2026
Updated
Sep 1, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 20, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs16th percentile — riskier than 16% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍openssl-encrypt

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

The revoke_key method in openssl_encrypt_server/modules/keyserver/service.py at lines 195-270 accepts a client_id parameter but never verifies that the requesting client is the same as key.owner_client_id.

Impact

Any authenticated client can revoke any other client's key, as long as they provide a valid revocation signature. While the signature requirement mitigates this somewhat (you need the private key to sign), the lack of ownership check is a defense-in-depth gap.

Recommended Fix

  • Add an ownership check: verify client_id == key.owner_client_id before allowing revocation
  • Return 403 Forbidden if the requesting client does not own the key

Fix

Fixed in commit 05e45f3 on branch releases/1.4.x — added documentation that ML-DSA signature verification IS the cryptographic ownership check; added info-level logging on successful verification.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIopenssl-encryptall versions1.4.0pip install --upgrade 'openssl-encrypt==1.4.0'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for openssl-encrypt, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update openssl-encrypt to 1.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary The `revoke_key` method in `openssl_encrypt_server/modules/keyserver/service.py` at **lines 195-270** accepts a `client_id` parameter but never verifies that the requesting client is the same as `key.owner_client_id`. ### Impact Any authenticated client can revoke any other client's key, as long as they provide a valid revocation signature. While the signature requirement mitigates this somewhat (you need the private key to sign), the lack of ownership check is a defense-in-depth gap. ### Recommended Fix - Add an ownership check: verify `client_id == key.owner_client_id` befor
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-hvc7-763r-4f3h: openssl-encrypt | O3 Security