Know every vulnerabilitybefore it knows you.
DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.
GHSA-7m29-f4hw-g2vx
No affected components available
There is a fingerprint mismatch with Chrome when using GREASE ECH, having to do with ciphersuite selection. When Chrome selects the preferred ciphersuite in the outer ClientHello and the ciphersuite for ECH, it does so consistently based on hardware support. That means, for example, if it prefers AES for the outer ciphersuite, it would also use AES for ECH. The Chrome parrot in utls hardcodes AES preference for outer ciphersuites but selects the ECH ciphersuite randomly between AES and ChaCha20. So there is a 50% chance of selecting ChaCha20 for ECH while using AES for the outer ciphersuite, which is impossible in Chrome.
This is only a problem in GREASE ECH, since in real ECH Chrome selects the first valid ciphersuite when AES is preferred, which is the same in utls. So no change is done there.
Affected symbols: HelloChrome_120, HelloChrome_120_PQ, HelloChrome_131, HelloChrome_133
Fix commit: 24bd1e05a788c1add7f3037f4532ea552b2cee07
Thanks to telegram @acgdaily for reporting this issue.
The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is difficult for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability and may require special conditions. An attacker does not need any special privileges or access rights.
Limited exploitation activity has been observed. Close monitoring and planned remediation are recommended.
The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.
We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.
Browse More
Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.
Checkout DevGuard