CVE-2026-45614
Is CVE-2026-45614 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.
baseline read
auto · not a community verdict
Officially disputed
The CVE record itself is disputed or rejected upstream — a strong candidate for a false positive in scanners. Confirm with a verdict.
Based on NVD record status
Confirm or dispute →CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
OP-TEE is a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) designed as companion to a non-secure Linux kernel running on Arm; Cortex-A cores using the TrustZone technology. Prior to version 4.11.0, on many of the ECDH shared secret paths, the public key isn't verified to be a point on the correct curve. By passing approximately 30-40 crafted public keys to OP-TEE, the private key can be reconstructed by a normal world attacker. When calling TEE_DeriveKey the public key is provided with full X and Y values, but the (X, Y) point might not satisfy the `Y^2 == X^3 + aX + b mod P` math for the specific curve that is used. When those public keys aren't rejected, the attacker can select public keys such that each DeriveKey call will leak `d % r` where `d` is the private key and `r` comes from the relationship between the correct curve and the attacker selected curve. With enough leaked data the Chinese remainder theorem can be used to recover the full private key. Version 4.11.0 fixes the issue.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45614)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45614"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45614/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45614"></a>Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.
Community ground truth
Be the first practitioner to weigh in
So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.
🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.
In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?
awaiting field verdictsCurated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.
No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.
Field notes & remediation
Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.
- 0
No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.
Add a field note or remediationoptional
Related CVEs
Same weakness: CWE-347.
- CVE-2025-59718CRIT 9.8KEVEPSS 66%
A improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiOS 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.17, FortiProxy 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiProxy 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.14, FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.21, FortiSwitchManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.6, FortiSwitchManager 7.0.0 through 7.0.5 allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass the FortiCloud SSO login authentication via a crafted SAML response message.
- CVE-2026-48558CRIT 10KEVEPSS 1%
SimpleHelp versions 5.5.15 and prior and 6.0 pre-release versions contain an authentication bypass vulnerability in the OIDC authentication flow. When OIDC authentication is configured, identity tokens submitted during login are accepted without verifying their cryptographic signature. In a vulnerable configuration, a remote, unauthenticated attacker can submit a forged token containing arbitrary identity claims to obtain a fully authenticated technician session. In some configurations, this may also allow bypass of multi-factor authentication. No user interaction is required.
- CVE-2026-64623HIGH 8.6
Network-AI before 5.13.4 contains an improper cryptographic signature verification vulnerability in APSAdapter where the default local verifier accepts any non-empty string as valid. Unauthenticated attackers can submit forged APS delegation payloads with arbitrary scopes to bypass signature verification and obtain signed permission-grant tokens for sensitive resources including SHELL_EXEC.
- CVE-2026-10723MED 6.8
BIND may accept incorrect child-zone NSEC3 records as valid, which could allow an attacker to forge authenticated NXDOMAIN responses. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.
- CVE-2026-49834MED 5.9
sigstore-go is a Go library for Sigstore signing and verification. Prior to 1.2.0, a verifier configured with WithTransparencyLog(N>1) or WithSignedCertificateTimestamps(N>1) counts verified witnesses per entry or per validation path rather than per log authority, allowing a single compromised transparency log or CT log to satisfy multi-log threshold requirements and defeat the multi-log policy. This issue is fixed in version 1.2.0.
- CVE-2026-40372CRIT 9.1EPSS 11%
Improper verification of cryptographic signature in ASP.NET Core allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.