CVSS: 4.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 2EXPL: 0CVE-2016-1000346 – bouncycastle: Other party DH public keys are not fully validated
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-1000346
In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the other party DH public key is not fully validated. This can cause issues as invalid keys can be used to reveal details about the other party's private key where static Diffie-Hellman is in use. As of release 1.56 the key parameters are checked on agreement calculation. En Bouncy Castle JCE Provider, en versiones 1.55 y anteriores, no se valida completamente la clave pública DH de la otra parte. Esto puede causar problemas, ya que las claves inválidas pueden emplearse para revelar detalles sobre la clave privada de la otra parte donde se emplea Diffie-Hellman estático. • https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2669 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2927 https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/1127131c89021612c6eefa26dbe5714c194e7495#diff-d525a20b8acaed791ae2f0f770eb5937 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/07/msg00009.html https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20181127-0004 https://usn.ubuntu.com/3727-1 https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2020.html https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-1000346 https://bugzilla.redhat.com • CWE-320: Key Management Errors CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 2EXPL: 0CVE-2016-1000339 – bouncycastle: Information leak in AESFastEngine class
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-1000339
In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the primary engine class used for AES was AESFastEngine. Due to the highly table driven approach used in the algorithm it turns out that if the data channel on the CPU can be monitored the lookup table accesses are sufficient to leak information on the AES key being used. There was also a leak in AESEngine although it was substantially less. AESEngine has been modified to remove any signs of leakage (testing carried out on Intel X86-64) and is now the primary AES class for the BC JCE provider from 1.56. Use of AESFastEngine is now only recommended where otherwise deemed appropriate. • https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2669 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2927 https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/413b42f4d770456508585c830cfcde95f9b0e93b#diff-54656f860db94b867ba7542430cd2ef0 https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/8a73f08931450c17c749af067b6a8185abdfd2c0#diff-494fb066bed02aeb76b6c005632943f2 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/07/msg00009.html https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20181127-0004 https://usn.ubuntu.com/3727-1 https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoc • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-310: Cryptographic Issues •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 2EXPL: 0CVE-2016-1000342 – bouncycastle: ECDSA improper validation of ASN.1 encoding of signature
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-1000342
In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier ECDSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure. En Bouncy Castle JCE Provider en versiones 1.55 y anteriores, el ECDSA no valida completamente el cifrado ASN.1 de la firma en verificación. Es posible inyectar elementos extra en la secuencia que forma la firma y, aún así, validarla. En algunos casos, esto podría permitir la introducción de datos "invisibles" en una estructura firmada. • https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2669 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2927 https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/843c2e60f67d71faf81d236f448ebbe56c62c647#diff-25c3c78db788365f36839b3f2d3016b9 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/07/msg00009.html https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20181127-0004 https://usn.ubuntu.com/3727-1 https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2020.html https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-1000342 https://bugzilla.redhat.com • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation CWE-347: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 2EXPL: 0CVE-2016-1000343 – bouncycastle: DSA key pair generator generates a weak private key by default
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-1000343
In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA key pair generator generates a weak private key if used with default values. If the JCA key pair generator is not explicitly initialised with DSA parameters, 1.55 and earlier generates a private value assuming a 1024 bit key size. In earlier releases this can be dealt with by explicitly passing parameters to the key pair generator. En Bouncy Castle JCE Provider en versiones 1.55 y anteriores, el generador de pares de claves DSA genera una clave privada débil si se emplea con los valores por defecto. Si el generador de pares de claves JCA no se inicializa explícitamente con parámetros DSA, las versiones 1.55 y anteriores generan un valor privado asumiendo un tamaño de clave de 1024 bits. • https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2669 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2927 https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/50a53068c094d6cff37659da33c9b4505becd389#diff-5578e61500abb2b87b300d3114bdfd7d https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/708d94141126eac03011144a971a6411fcac16d9c248d1d535a39451%40%3Csolr-user.lucene.apache.org%3E https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/07/msg00009.html https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20181127-0004 https://usn.ubuntu.com/3727-1 https://www.oracle.com/secur • CWE-310: Cryptographic Issues CWE-338: Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 1EXPL: 0CVE-2016-1000340 – bouncycastle: Carry propagation bug in math.raw.Nat??? class
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-1000340
In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider versions 1.51 to 1.55, a carry propagation bug was introduced in the implementation of squaring for several raw math classes have been fixed (org.bouncycastle.math.raw.Nat???). These classes are used by our custom elliptic curve implementations (org.bouncycastle.math.ec.custom.**), so there was the possibility of rare (in general usage) spurious calculations for elliptic curve scalar multiplications. Such errors would have been detected with high probability by the output validation for our scalar multipliers. En Bouncy Castle JCE Provider, de la versión 1.51 a la 1.55, se solucionó la introducción de un error de propagación de dígito (carry propagation) en la implementación de la elevación al cuadrado para varias clases raw math (org.bouncycastle.math.raw.Nat???). Las implementaciones de curva elíptica personalizadas emplean estas clases (org.bouncycastle.math.ec.custom.**), por lo que existe la posibilidad de que haya cálculos raros falsos para las multiplicaciones escalares de curva elíptica. • https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2669 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2927 https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/790642084c4e0cadd47352054f868cc8397e2c00#diff-e5934feac8203ca0104ab291a3560a31 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20181127-0004 https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2020.html https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-1000340 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1588688 • CWE-19: Data Processing Errors CWE-682: Incorrect Calculation •