Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2019-1552· NVD / CVE Program· CNA openssl

Windows builds with insecure path defaults

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 13/100)

  • The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
  • Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.69% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 51.7% of all records.
  • Someone with local access to the system can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
  • According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
  • Mentioned 2 times in Turkish national cyber security advisories (siberguvenlik.gov.tr).

Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

OpenSSL has internal defaults for a directory tree where it can find a configuration file as well as certificates used for verification in TLS. This directory is most commonly referred to as OPENSSLDIR, and is configurable with the --prefix / --openssldir configuration options. For OpenSSL versions 1.1.0 and 1.1.1, the mingw configuration targets assume that resulting programs and libraries are installed in a Unix-like environment and the default prefix for program installation as well as for OPENSSLDIR should be '/usr/local'. However, mingw programs are Windows programs, and as such, find themselves looking at sub-directories of 'C:/usr/local', which may be world writable, which enables untrusted users to modify OpenSSL's default configuration, insert CA certificates, modify (or even replace) existing engine modules, etc. For OpenSSL 1.0.2, '/usr/local/ssl' is used as default for OPENSSLDIR on all Unix and Windows targets, including Visual C builds. However, some build instructions for the diverse Windows targets on 1.0.2 encourage you to specify your own --prefix. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1, 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 are affected by this issue. Due to the limited scope of affected deployments this has been assessed as low severity and therefore we are not creating new releases at this time. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0l (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2t (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2s).

LowCVSS 3.3 · v3.0—No exploit No fix recorded
Published
Jul 30, 2019
Updated
Jun 16, 2026
EPSS
0.7% · 52th percentile

Report tools

JSON

Action score

13

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
13 / 40 · 3.3 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.7%

Get told when this record changes

  • Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
  • No public exploit code on record
  • No fixed version yet

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Follow CVE-2019-1552

When you'll hear from us

  • when it enters CISA KEV
  • when exploit code appears or is weaponized
  • when the record is updated (including a fixed version)
  • when EPSS rises 20 points in a week

One daily email digest (06:00 UTC); connect a webhook for KEV listings and weaponized exploits instantly.

Your free account also gets you

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

  • Stack alerts: add the products and versions you run, get the new CVEs that affect them
  • Port scanning: 5 full scans a day (members only)
  • Uptime monitoring: 1 site, instant email when it goes down
  • Verify your domain: subdomains and takeover risk scanned every week
  • 10 scans an hour on the security tools (3 a day without an account), an API key and MCP
All free tools

Sign up with email · Have an account? Sign in

Free account, no card. Unfollow any time.

Don't want an account? Get "Exploited this week" by email every MondayDon't want an account? RSS feed for openssl records

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

VendorProduct
opensslopenssl

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • openssl openssl1.0.2 and later · up to 1.0.2s inclusive
  • openssl openssl1.1.0 and later · up to 1.1.0k inclusive
  • openssl openssl1.1.1 and later · up to 1.1.1c inclusive

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (openssl). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • OpenSSL OpenSSL

    • Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c), Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0l (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0k), Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2t (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2s)affected

Same product

openssl: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2014-0160The (1) TLS and (2) DTLS implementations in OpenSSL 1.0.1 before 1.0.1g do not properly handle Heartbeat Extension packets, which allows remKEV
    90Now
  • CVE-2021-3711SM2 Decryption Buffer Overflow
    65This week
  • CVE-2003-0545Double free vulnerability in OpenSSL 0.9.7 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code
    65This week
  • CVE-2016-2108The ASN.1 implementation in OpenSSL before 1.0.1o and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2c allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denia
    62This week
  • CVE-2016-6309statem/statem.c in OpenSSL 1.1.0a does not consider memory-block movement after a realloc call, which allows remote attackers to cause a den
    60This week
  • CVE-2022-3786X.509 Email Address Variable Length Buffer Overflow
    58Plan

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

National notice (Türkiye Cybersecurity Directorate / USOM)

Official security notices citing this record; remediation advice is on the agency's page.

All national notices →

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
  • A low-privileged account is enough.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
none
Integrity
low · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
none
Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
None
Integrity impact
Low
Availability impact
None

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

nvd-primary

Root cause

A certificate validation error is silently swallowed instead of terminating the connection. Often, code added for a test environment makes its way into production.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-295 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

kotlin
override fun checkServerTrusted(chain: Array<X509Certificate>, type: String) {  // Left empty for the test environment}

Fixed

kotlin
val client = OkHttpClient.Builder()  .certificatePinner(    CertificatePinner.Builder()      .add("api.sirius.example", "sha256/…")      .build()  ).build()

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

References

Show all references (19 more)

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records