PatchSiren cyber security CVE debrief
CVE-2016-6329 Openvpn CVE debrief
CVE-2016-6329 is a confidentiality issue in OpenVPN tied to the use of 64-bit block ciphers. NVD describes it as making it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, with an HTTP-over-OpenVPN Blowfish-CBC example of the Sweet32 class of attacks. The NVD record lists affected OpenVPN versions up to 2.3.14 when configured with a vulnerable cipher.
- Vendor
- Openvpn
- Product
- Unknown
- CVSS
- MEDIUM 5.9
- CISA KEV
- Not listed in stored evidence
- Original CVE published
- 2019-07-09
- Original CVE updated
- 2019-07-09
- Advisory published
- 2019-07-09
- Advisory updated
- 2019-07-09
Who should care
OpenVPN administrators and security teams that still allow 64-bit block ciphers, especially Blowfish in CBC mode, in long-lived VPN sessions. Operators of environments carrying sustained traffic through OpenVPN tunnels should review cipher configuration and upgrade status first.
Technical summary
The issue is a Sweet32-style cryptographic weakness: 64-bit block ciphers become more exposed to birthday-bound collisions as traffic volume grows over long sessions. In the NVD record, the vulnerability is mapped to CVE-2002-style information exposure and cryptographic weakness categories (CWE-200 and CWE-310) and scored CVSS 3.0 5.9/Medium with network attack vector, high complexity, no privileges, and confidentiality impact only. The affected CPE range in the record is OpenVPN through 2.3.14.
Defensive priority
Medium. The impact is limited to confidentiality, but the attack can be remote and targets a common legacy cipher class that may still be enabled in older deployments.
Recommended defensive actions
- Review OpenVPN configurations for any use of 64-bit block ciphers, especially Blowfish-CBC, and replace them with stronger, modern cipher choices supported by your OpenVPN version.
- Upgrade OpenVPN beyond the vulnerable range listed by NVD (through 2.3.14) where feasible, and validate cipher settings after upgrade.
- Inventory long-lived VPN tunnels and high-volume applications over OpenVPN, since the issue is specifically associated with long-duration encrypted sessions.
- Use the OpenVPN SWEET32 vendor advisory and related vendor guidance to confirm recommended configuration changes for your deployment.
- Verify with testing and configuration review that legacy cipher negotiation is disabled where not required by compatibility constraints.
Evidence notes
Supported by the NVD description for CVE-2016-6329, which states that OpenVPN using a 64-bit block cipher can allow remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, demonstrated with an HTTP-over-OpenVPN Blowfish-CBC scenario. The NVD data also lists affected OpenVPN versions through 2.3.14 and a CVSS 3.0 vector of AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N. The vendor advisory link in the NVD references is the OpenVPN SWEET32 page.
Sources and references
Verified primary and authoritative sources
-
CVE-2016-6329 CVE Program record
Publisher, destination, and source semantics verified
URL: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2016-6329
CVE Program - Official CVE Program record with source-provided CVE metadata.
-
CVE-2016-6329 NVD vulnerability detail
Publisher, destination, and source semantics verified
URL: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-6329
NIST National Vulnerability Database - Official NIST NVD detail page and source-specific vulnerability assessment.
Supplemental references
-
Source reference
Unverified legacy reference
URL: https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-556833.pdf
-
Mitigation or vendor reference
Unverified legacy reference
URL: https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/SWEET32
[email protected] - Vendor Advisory
Methodology and review provenance
AI-assisted synthesis based on stored public vulnerability evidence. System validation, approval state, and publication status do not by themselves establish human review of this revision. PatchSiren helps prioritize defensive review and does not prove exposure or remediation on any system.