CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 1%CPEs: 5EXPL: 0CVE-2018-0737 – Cache timing vulnerability in RSA Key Generation
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2018-0737
The OpenSSL RSA Key generation algorithm has been shown to be vulnerable to a cache timing side channel attack. An attacker with sufficient access to mount cache timing attacks during the RSA key generation process could recover the private key. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0i-dev (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0h). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2p-dev (Affected 1.0.2b-1.0.2o). Se ha demostrado que el algoritmo de generación de claves RSA en OpenSSL es vulnerable a un ataque de sincronización de canal lateral de caché. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103766 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1040685 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3221 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3505 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3932 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3933 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3935 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=349a41da1ad88ad87825414752a8ff5f • CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm CWE-385: Covert Timing Channel •
CVSS: 6.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 8EXPL: 0CVE-2018-0739 – Constructed ASN.1 types with a recursive definition could exceed the stack
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2018-0739
Constructed ASN.1 types with a recursive definition (such as can be found in PKCS7) could eventually exceed the stack given malicious input with excessive recursion. This could result in a Denial Of Service attack. There are no such structures used within SSL/TLS that come from untrusted sources so this is considered safe. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0h (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0g). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2o (Affected 1.0.2b-1.0.2n). • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103518 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/105609 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1040576 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3090 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3221 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3505 https&# • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-674: Uncontrolled Recursion •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 1%CPEs: 1EXPL: 0CVE-2018-0733 – Incorrect CRYPTO_memcmp on HP-UX PA-RISC
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2018-0733
Because of an implementation bug the PA-RISC CRYPTO_memcmp function is effectively reduced to only comparing the least significant bit of each byte. This allows an attacker to forge messages that would be considered as authenticated in an amount of tries lower than that guaranteed by the security claims of the scheme. The module can only be compiled by the HP-UX assembler, so that only HP-UX PA-RISC targets are affected. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0h (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0g). Debido a un error de implementación, la función CRYPTO_memcmp en PA-RISC únicamente compara el bit menos significativo o de menor peso de cada byte. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103517 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1040576 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=56d5a4bfcaf37fa420aef2bb881aa55e61cf5f2f https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/201811-21 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20180330-0002 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20180327.txt https://www.oracle. •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 34EXPL: 0CVE-2017-3738 – openssl: rsaz_1024_mul_avx2 overflow bug on x86_64
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-3738
There is an overflow bug in the AVX2 Montgomery multiplication procedure used in exponentiation with 1024-bit moduli. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against RSA and DSA as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH1024 are considered just feasible, because most of the work necessary to deduce information about a private key may be performed offline. The amount of resources required for such an attack would be significant. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/102118 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039978 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0998 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2185 https://access.redhat.co • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 94%CPEs: 13EXPL: 0CVE-2017-3737 – openssl: Read/write after SSL object in error state
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2017-3737
OpenSSL 1.0.2 (starting from version 1.0.2b) introduced an "error state" mechanism. The intent was that if a fatal error occurred during a handshake then OpenSSL would move into the error state and would immediately fail if you attempted to continue the handshake. This works as designed for the explicit handshake functions (SSL_do_handshake(), SSL_accept() and SSL_connect()), however due to a bug it does not work correctly if SSL_read() or SSL_write() is called directly. In that scenario, if the handshake fails then a fatal error will be returned in the initial function call. If SSL_read()/SSL_write() is subsequently called by the application for the same SSL object then it will succeed and the data is passed without being decrypted/encrypted directly from the SSL/TLS record layer. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/102103 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039978 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0998 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2185 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2186 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018: • CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read CWE-391: Unchecked Error Condition CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write •