Skip to main content
0-Doubt
NewsInvestorsQuestionnairesDeveloperHelp
AnonymousSign in
0-Doubt — neutral IT/Security research
BrowseResellersCertified analystsRFI/RFP questionnairesHow trust worksHelp & FAQAPI
  1. Home/
  2. wolfSSL

wolfSSL

enriched
Key Management

wolfssl.com ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users

Do you work at wolfSSL?

This profile was built from public sources and hasn't been claimed yet. Claiming it lets you correct what's wrong and add details only you can confirm — and marks that information as vendor-verified for buyers.

Free, and it does not affect ranking, placement, or comparison results. The first person verified on wolfSSL's email domain becomes the profile admin.

Claim this profileAlready have an account?

Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of wolfSSL we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.

Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.

checked 6 of 16 signals
  • Limited

    Independently verified

    Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?

    checked 3 of 4

    Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.

    • No third-party certifications found
    • Profile not claimed by the vendor
  • Limited

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 2 of 4

    How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.

    • Headquarters location not disclosed on their site
  • Mixed

    Behaviour under stress

    What do they do when something goes wrong?

    checked 1 of 3

    What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.

    • 98 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
    • 19 rated critical
  • Not checked

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 0 of 3

    We have not checked what this vendor discloses publicly yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against wolfSSL.

  • Not checked

    Momentum

    Are they still shipping, or coasting?

    checked 0 of 2

    We have not tracked this vendor's release activity yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against wolfSSL.

Data coverage: 13/100What this measures (and doesn't)

Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.

Verification depth0/100
Security signal0/100
Buyer feedbackno data yet (0 reviews so far)
Profile completeness13/100
claim · HQ · materials · screenshots · integrations · certifications · security check

The platform admin controls the formula's weights.

Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.

VerificationSecurityFeedbackCompletenessThis vendor — Verification: 0This vendor — Security: 0This vendor — Feedback: no data yetThis vendor — Completeness: 13

Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.

verified buyers only

No buyer reviews yet.

Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.

anonymous

No ratings in this window yet.

Lightweight embedded TLS/SSL library for devices, apps, and cloud. AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →

CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL2014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026CVE-2026-5393 · CRITICAL 9.1 · 2026-04-10CVE-2026-5504 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2026-04-10CVE-2026-5295 · HIGH 8.0 · 2026-04-10CVE-2026-5778 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2026-04-10CVE-2026-5263 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2026-04-10CVE-2026-5446 · HIGH 7.1 · 2026-04-10CVE-2026-4159 · LOW 3.3 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-4395 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3849 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3549 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3547 · HIGH 7.5 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3230 · LOW 2.7 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3580 · MEDIUM 4.7 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3579 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2026-03-20CVE-2026-3503 · MEDIUM 5.2 · 2026-03-19CVE-2026-3548 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2026-03-19CVE-2026-2646 · HIGH 8.1 · 2026-03-19CVE-2026-2645 · HIGH 7.5 · 2026-03-19CVE-2026-1005 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2026-03-19CVE-2026-0819 · HIGH 7.1 · 2026-03-19CVE-2025-11936 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2025-11-22CVE-2025-11934 · LOW 2.7 · 2025-11-22CVE-2025-11933 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2025-11-22CVE-2025-7396 · MEDIUM 4.6 · 2025-07-19CVE-2025-7394 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2025-07-19CVE-2025-5025 · MEDIUM 4.8 · 2025-05-28CVE-2024-2881 · MEDIUM 6.7 · 2024-08-30CVE-2024-1545 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2024-08-30CVE-2024-1543 · MEDIUM 4.1 · 2024-08-30CVE-2024-5991 · HIGH 7.5 · 2024-08-27CVE-2024-5288 · MEDIUM 5.1 · 2024-08-27CVE-2024-2379 · MEDIUM 6.3 · 2024-03-27CVE-2023-6936 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2024-02-21CVE-2023-6937 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2024-02-15CVE-2023-6935 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2024-02-10CVE-2023-3724 · CRITICAL 9.1 · 2023-07-18CVE-2022-42905 · CRITICAL 9.1 · 2022-11-07CVE-2022-42961 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2022-10-15CVE-2022-39173 · HIGH 7.5 · 2022-09-29CVE-2021-44718 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2022-09-02CVE-2022-38153 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2022-08-31CVE-2022-38152 · HIGH 7.5 · 2022-08-31CVE-2022-34293 · HIGH 7.5 · 2022-08-08CVE-2022-25640 · HIGH 7.5 · 2022-02-24CVE-2022-25638 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2022-02-24CVE-2022-23408 · CRITICAL 9.1 · 2022-01-19CVE-2021-45939 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-45938 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-45937 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-45936 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-45934 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-45933 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-45932 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2022-01-01CVE-2021-38597 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2021-08-12CVE-2021-37155 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-07-21CVE-2021-24116 · MEDIUM 4.9 · 2021-07-14CVE-2021-3336 · HIGH 8.1 · 2021-01-29CVE-2020-36177 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-24613 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2020-08-25CVE-2020-24585 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2020-08-21CVE-2020-15309 · HIGH 7.0 · 2020-08-21CVE-2020-12457 · HIGH 7.5 · 2020-08-21CVE-2020-11735 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2020-06-25CVE-2020-11713 · HIGH 7.5 · 2020-04-12CVE-2014-2898 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-01-28CVE-2014-2897 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-01-28CVE-2014-2896 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-01-28CVE-2019-19963 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2019-12-25CVE-2019-19962 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-12-25CVE-2019-19960 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2019-12-25CVE-2019-14317 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2019-12-11CVE-2014-2904 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-11-22CVE-2014-2902 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-11-22CVE-2014-2901 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-11-22CVE-2019-18840 · HIGH 7.5 · 2019-11-09CVE-2019-13628 · MEDIUM 4.7 · 2019-10-03CVE-2019-16748 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-09-24CVE-2019-15651 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-08-27CVE-2019-11873 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-05-23CVE-2019-6439 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-01-16CVE-2018-16870 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2019-01-03CVE-2018-12436 · MEDIUM 4.7 · 2018-06-15CVE-2017-13099 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-12-13CVE-2017-2800 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-05-24CVE-2017-8855 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-05-10CVE-2017-8854 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-05-10CVE-2017-6076 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2017-02-24CVE-2016-7440 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2016-12-13CVE-2016-7439 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2016-12-13CVE-2016-7438 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2016-12-13CVE-2015-7744 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2016-01-22CVE-2015-6925 · HIGH 7.5 · 2016-01-22CVE-2014-2899 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2014-04-22CVE-2014-2900 · MEDIUM 5.8 · 2014-04-22CVE-2013-1623 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2013-02-09

Known CVEs (98)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.

RSS ⇢
  • CVE-2026-5393 ↗CRITICAL 9.12026

    Dual-Algorithm CertificateVerify out-of-bounds read. When processing a dual-algorithm CertificateVerify message, an out-of-bounds read can occur on crafted input. This can only occur when --enable-exp…

  • CVE-2026-5504 ↗MEDIUM 5.32026

    A padding oracle exists in wolfSSL's PKCS7 CBC decryption that could allow an attacker to recover plaintext through repeated decryption queries with modified ciphertext. In previous versions of wolfSS…

  • CVE-2026-5295 ↗HIGH 8.02026

    A stack buffer overflow exists in wolfSSL's PKCS7 implementation in the wc_PKCS7_DecryptOri() function in wolfcrypt/src/pkcs7.c. When processing a CMS EnvelopedData message containing an OtherRecipien…

  • CVE-2026-5778 ↗MEDIUM 6.52026

    Integer underflow in wolfSSL packet sniffer <= 5.9.0 allows an attacker to cause a program crash in the AEAD decryption path by injecting a TLS record shorter than the explicit IV plus authentication …

  • CVE-2026-5263 ↗MEDIUM 6.52026

    URI nameConstraints from constrained intermediate CAs are parsed but not enforced during certificate chain verification in wolfcrypt/src/asn.c. A compromised or malicious sub-CA could issue leaf certi…

  • CVE-2026-5446 ↗HIGH 7.12026

    In wolfSSL, ARIA-GCM cipher suites used in TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 reuse an identical 12-byte GCM nonce for every application-data record. Because wc_AriaEncrypt is stateless and passes the caller-suppli…

  • CVE-2026-4159 ↗LOW 3.32026

    1-byte OOB heap read in wc_PKCS7_DecodeEnvelopedData via zero-length encrypted content. A vulnerability existed in wolfSSL 5.8.4 and earlier, where a 1-byte out-of-bounds heap read in wc_PKCS7_DecodeE…

  • CVE-2026-4395 ↗CRITICAL 9.82026

    Heap-based buffer overflow in the KCAPI ECC code path of wc_ecc_import_x963_ex() in wolfSSL wolfcrypt allows a remote attacker to write attacker-controlled data past the bounds of the pubkey_raw buffe…

  • CVE-2026-3849 ↗CRITICAL 9.82026

    Stack Buffer Overflow in wc_HpkeLabeledExtract via Oversized ECH Config. A vulnerability existed in wolfSSL 5.8.4 ECH (Encrypted Client Hello) support, where a maliciously crafted ECH config could cau…

  • CVE-2026-3549 ↗CRITICAL 9.82026

    Heap Overflow in TLS 1.3 ECH parsing. An integer underflow existed in ECH extension parsing logic when calculating a buffer length, which resulted in writing beyond the bounds of an allocated buffer. …

  • CVE-2026-3547 ↗HIGH 7.52026

    Out-of-bounds read in ALPN parsing due to incomplete validation. wolfSSL 5.8.4 and earlier contained an out-of-bounds read in ALPN handling when built with ALPN enabled (HAVE_ALPN / --enable-alpn). A …

  • CVE-2026-3230 ↗LOW 2.72026

    Missing required cryptographic step in the TLS 1.3 client HelloRetryRequest handshake logic in wolfSSL could lead to a compromise in the confidentiality of TLS-protected communications via a crafted H…

  • CVE-2026-3580 ↗MEDIUM 4.72026

    In wolfSSL 5.8.4, constant-time masking logic in sp_256_get_entry_256_9 is optimized into conditional branches (bnez) by GCC when targeting RISC-V RV32I with -O3. This transformation breaks the side-c…

  • CVE-2026-3579 ↗MEDIUM 5.92026

    wolfSSL 5.8.4 on RISC-V RV32I architectures lacks a constant-time software implementation for 64-bit multiplication. The compiler-inserted __muldi3 subroutine executes in variable time based on operan…

  • CVE-2026-3503 ↗MEDIUM 5.22026

    Protection mechanism failure in wolfCrypt post-quantum implementations (ML-KEM and ML-DSA) in wolfSSL on ARM Cortex-M microcontrollers allows a physical attacker to compromise key material and/or cryp…

  • CVE-2026-3548 ↗CRITICAL 9.82026

    Two buffer overflow vulnerabilities existed in the wolfSSL CRL parser when parsing CRL numbers: a heap-based buffer overflow could occur when improperly storing the CRL number as a hexadecimal string,…

  • CVE-2026-2646 ↗HIGH 8.12026

    A heap-buffer-overflow vulnerability exists in wolfSSL's wolfSSL_d2i_SSL_SESSION() function. When deserializing session data with SESSION_CERTS enabled, certificate and session id lengths are read fro…

  • CVE-2026-2645 ↗HIGH 7.52026

    In wolfSSL 5.8.2 and earlier, a logic flaw existed in the TLS 1.2 server state machine implementation. The server could incorrectly accept the CertificateVerify message before the ClientKeyExchange me…

  • CVE-2026-1005 ↗MEDIUM 5.32026

    Integer underflow in wolfSSL packet sniffer <= 5.8.4 allows an attacker to cause a buffer overflow in the AEAD decryption path by injecting a TLS record shorter than the explicit IV plus authenticatio…

  • CVE-2026-0819 ↗HIGH 7.12026

    A stack buffer overflow vulnerability exists in wolfSSL's PKCS7 SignedData encoding functionality. In wc_PKCS7_BuildSignedAttributes(), when adding custom signed attributes, the code passes an incorre…

  • …and 78 more

Resources & materials (2)

discovered on their site

Datasheets, whitepapers, and case studies found on wolfssl.com by the enrichment loop. Links open the original documents on the vendor's own site.

  • pdfGesytec WolfSSL Case Study↗
  • pdfSaficard Case Study By WolfSSL↗

Competitors (12)

full alternatives comparison →
Akeyless SecurityAlibaba CloudArmorxAIAtakamaCigentCocoon DataCosmianCrypto4ACryptomathicCryptsoftDuoKeyEngage Black

Products (1)

Key Management

1
  • wolfSSL Embedded SSL/TLS LibraryAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Lightweight embedded TLS/SSL library for devices, apps, and cloud.