CVSS: 4.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 4EXPL: 0CVE-2024-9143 – Low-level invalid GF(2^m) parameters lead to OOB memory access
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2024-9143
Issue summary: Use of the low-level GF(2^m) elliptic curve APIs with untrusted explicit values for the field polynomial can lead to out-of-bounds memory reads or writes. Impact summary: Out of bound memory writes can lead to an application crash or even a possibility of a remote code execution, however, in all the protocols involving Elliptic Curve Cryptography that we're aware of, either only "named curves" are supported, or, if explicit curve parameters are supported, they specify an X9.62 encoding of binary (GF(2^m)) curves that can't represent problematic input values. Thus the likelihood of existence of a vulnerable application is low. In particular, the X9.62 encoding is used for ECC keys in X.509 certificates, so problematic inputs cannot occur in the context of processing X.509 certificates. Any problematic use-cases would have to be using an "exotic" curve encoding. The affected APIs include: EC_GROUP_new_curve_GF2m(), EC_GROUP_new_from_params(), and various supporting BN_GF2m_*() functions. Applications working with "exotic" explicit binary (GF(2^m)) curve parameters, that make it possible to represent invalid field polynomials with a zero constant term, via the above or similar APIs, may terminate abruptly as a result of reading or writing outside of array bounds. Remote code execution cannot easily be ruled out. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. Resumen del problema: el uso de las API de curva elíptica GF(2^m) de bajo nivel con valores explícitos no confiables para el campo polinomial puede generar lecturas o escrituras de memoria fuera de los límites. • https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/72ae83ad214d2eef262461365a1975707f862712 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/bc7e04d7c8d509fb78fc0e285aa948fb0da04700 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/c0d3e4d32d2805f49bec30547f225bc4d092e1f4 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/fdf6723362ca51bd883295efe206cb5b1cfa5154 https://github.openssl.org/openssl/extended-releases/commit/8efc0cbaa8ebba8e116f7b81a876a4123594d86a https://github.openssl.org/openssl/extended-releases/commit/9d576994cec2b7aa37a91740ea7e680810957e41 https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20241016.txt • CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 4EXPL: 0CVE-2024-6119 – Possible denial of service in X.509 name checks
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2024-6119
Issue summary: Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address resulting in abnormal termination of the application process. Impact summary: Abnormal termination of an application can a cause a denial of service. Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address when comparing the expected name with an `otherName` subject alternative name of an X.509 certificate. This may result in an exception that terminates the application program. Note that basic certificate chain validation (signatures, dates, ...) is not affected, the denial of service can occur only when the application also specifies an expected DNS name, Email address or IP address. TLS servers rarely solicit client certificates, and even when they do, they generally don't perform a name check against a reference identifier (expected identity), but rather extract the presented identity after checking the certificate chain. So TLS servers are generally not affected and the severity of the issue is Moderate. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. A flaw was found in OpenSSL. Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address resulting in abnormal termination of the application process. • https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20240903.txt https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7dfcee2cd2a63b2c64b9b4b0850be64cb695b0a0 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/05f360d9e849a1b277db628f1f13083a7f8dd04f https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/621f3729831b05ee828a3203eddb621d014ff2b2 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/06d1dc3fa96a2ba5a3e22735a033012aadc9f0d6 https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-6119 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2306158 • CWE-843: Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion') •
CVSS: 9.1EPSS: 0%CPEs: 4EXPL: 0CVE-2024-5535 – SSL_select_next_proto buffer overread
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2024-5535
Issue summary: Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto with an empty supported client protocols buffer may cause a crash or memory contents to be sent to the peer. Impact summary: A buffer overread can have a range of potential consequences such as unexpected application beahviour or a crash. In particular this issue could result in up to 255 bytes of arbitrary private data from memory being sent to the peer leading to a loss of confidentiality. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_select_next_proto function with a 0 length list of supported client protocols are affected by this issue. This would normally never be a valid scenario and is typically not under attacker control but may occur by accident in the case of a configuration or programming error in the calling application. The OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto is typically used by TLS applications that support ALPN (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation) or NPN (Next Protocol Negotiation). NPN is older, was never standardised and is deprecated in favour of ALPN. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/06/27/1 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/06/28/4 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/4ada436a1946cbb24db5ab4ca082b69c1bc10f37 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/99fb785a5f85315b95288921a321a935ea29a51e https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/cf6f91f6121f4db167405db2f0de410a456f260c https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/e86ac436f0bd54d4517745483e2315650fae7b2c https://github.openssl.org/openssl/extended-releases/commit/9947251413065a05189a63c9b7a6c1d4e224c21c https:/& • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 4EXPL: 0CVE-2024-4603 – Excessive time spent checking DSA keys and parameters
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2024-4603
Issue summary: Checking excessively long DSA keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions EVP_PKEY_param_check() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check a DSA public key or DSA parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service. The functions EVP_PKEY_param_check() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() perform various checks on DSA parameters. Some of those computations take a long time if the modulus (`p` parameter) is too large. Trying to use a very large modulus is slow and OpenSSL will not allow using public keys with a modulus which is over 10,000 bits in length for signature verification. However the key and parameter check functions do not limit the modulus size when performing the checks. An application that calls EVP_PKEY_param_check() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. These functions are not called by OpenSSL itself on untrusted DSA keys so only applications that directly call these functions may be vulnerable. Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey and pkeyparam command line applications when using the `-check` option. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are affected by this issue. Resumen del problema: la comprobación de claves o parámetros DSA excesivamente largos puede resultar muy lenta. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/05/16/2 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/3559e868e58005d15c6013a0c1fd832e51c73397 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/53ea06486d296b890d565fb971b2764fcd826e7e https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/9c39b3858091c152f52513c066ff2c5a47969f0d https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/da343d0605c826ef197aceedc67e8e04f065f740 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240621-0001 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20240516.txt https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024&# • CWE-606: Unchecked Input for Loop Condition CWE-834: Excessive Iteration •
CVSS: 3.7EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 0CVE-2024-2511 – Unbounded memory growth with session handling in TLSv1.3
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2024-2511
Issue summary: Some non-default TLS server configurations can cause unbounded memory growth when processing TLSv1.3 sessions Impact summary: An attacker may exploit certain server configurations to trigger unbounded memory growth that would lead to a Denial of Service This problem can occur in TLSv1.3 if the non-default SSL_OP_NO_TICKET option is being used (but not if early_data support is also configured and the default anti-replay protection is in use). In this case, under certain conditions, the session cache can get into an incorrect state and it will fail to flush properly as it fills. The session cache will continue to grow in an unbounded manner. A malicious client could deliberately create the scenario for this failure to force a Denial of Service. It may also happen by accident in normal operation. This issue only affects TLS servers supporting TLSv1.3. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/04/08/5 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7e4d731b1c07201ad9374c1cd9ac5263bdf35bce https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/b52867a9f618bb955bed2a3ce3db4d4f97ed8e5d https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/e9d7083e241670332e0443da0f0d4ffb52829f08 https://github.openssl.org/openssl/extended-releases/commit/5f8d25770ae6437db119dfc951e207271a326640 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240503-0013 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20240408.txt https://access.redhat.com/security&#x • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-1325: Improperly Controlled Sequential Memory Allocation •