CVSS: 7.4EPSS: 0%CPEs: 56EXPL: 0CVE-2021-3450 – CA certificate check bypass with X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2021-3450
The X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT flag enables additional security checks of the certificates present in a certificate chain. It is not set by default. Starting from OpenSSL version 1.1.1h a check to disallow certificates in the chain that have explicitly encoded elliptic curve parameters was added as an additional strict check. An error in the implementation of this check meant that the result of a previous check to confirm that certificates in the chain are valid CA certificates was overwritten. This effectively bypasses the check that non-CA certificates must not be able to issue other certificates. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/27/1 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/27/2 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/28/3 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/28/4 https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-389290.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=2a40b7bc7b94dd7de897a74571e7024f0cf0d63b https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44845 https://kc.mc • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 205EXPL: 0CVE-2021-3449 – NULL pointer deref in signature_algorithms processing
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2021-3449
An OpenSSL TLS server may crash if sent a maliciously crafted renegotiation ClientHello message from a client. If a TLSv1.2 renegotiation ClientHello omits the signature_algorithms extension (where it was present in the initial ClientHello), but includes a signature_algorithms_cert extension then a NULL pointer dereference will result, leading to a crash and a denial of service attack. A server is only vulnerable if it has TLSv1.2 and renegotiation enabled (which is the default configuration). OpenSSL TLS clients are not impacted by this issue. All OpenSSL 1.1.1 versions are affected by this issue. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/27/1 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/27/2 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/28/3 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/28/4 https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-389290.pdf https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-772220.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=fb9fa6b51defd48157eeb207f52181f735d96148 https://kb.pulse • CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 38EXPL: 0CVE-2021-23841 – Null pointer deref in X509_issuer_and_serial_hash()
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2021-23841
The OpenSSL public API function X509_issuer_and_serial_hash() attempts to create a unique hash value based on the issuer and serial number data contained within an X509 certificate. However it fails to correctly handle any errors that may occur while parsing the issuer field (which might occur if the issuer field is maliciously constructed). This may subsequently result in a NULL pointer deref and a crash leading to a potential denial of service attack. The function X509_issuer_and_serial_hash() is never directly called by OpenSSL itself so applications are only vulnerable if they use this function directly and they use it on certificates that may have been obtained from untrusted sources. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1i and below are affected by this issue. • http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/May/67 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/May/68 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/May/70 https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-637483.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=122a19ab48091c657f7cb1fb3af9fc07bd557bbf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=8252ee4d90f3f2004d3d0aeeed003ad49c9a7807 https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44846 https://security.gentoo.org/gls • CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 67EXPL: 0CVE-2021-23840 – Integer overflow in CipherUpdate
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2021-23840
Calls to EVP_CipherUpdate, EVP_EncryptUpdate and EVP_DecryptUpdate may overflow the output length argument in some cases where the input length is close to the maximum permissable length for an integer on the platform. In such cases the return value from the function call will be 1 (indicating success), but the output length value will be negative. This could cause applications to behave incorrectly or crash. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1i and below are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1j. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-389290.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=6a51b9e1d0cf0bf8515f7201b68fb0a3482b3dc1 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=9b1129239f3ebb1d1c98ce9ed41d5c9476c47cb2 https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44846 https://kc.mcafee.com/corporate/index?page=content&id=SB10366 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r58af02e294bd07f487e2c64ffc0a29b837db5600e33b6e698b9d696b%40%3Cissues.bookkeeper.apache.org%3E https:/ • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound •
CVSS: 4.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 15EXPL: 0CVE-2021-23839 – Incorrect SSLv2 rollback protection
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2021-23839
OpenSSL 1.0.2 supports SSLv2. If a client attempts to negotiate SSLv2 with a server that is configured to support both SSLv2 and more recent SSL and TLS versions then a check is made for a version rollback attack when unpadding an RSA signature. Clients that support SSL or TLS versions greater than SSLv2 are supposed to use a special form of padding. A server that supports greater than SSLv2 is supposed to reject connection attempts from a client where this special form of padding is present, because this indicates that a version rollback has occurred (i.e. both client and server support greater than SSLv2, and yet this is the version that is being requested). The implementation of this padding check inverted the logic so that the connection attempt is accepted if the padding is present, and rejected if it is absent. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-637483.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=30919ab80a478f2d81f2e9acdcca3fa4740cd547 https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44846 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20210219-0009 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240621-0006 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20210216.txt https://www.oracle.com//security-alerts/cpujul2021.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuApr2021.html&# • CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •