CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 23EXPL: 0CVE-2022-40303 – libxml2: integer overflows with XML_PARSE_HUGE
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-40303
An issue was discovered in libxml2 before 2.10.3. When parsing a multi-gigabyte XML document with the XML_PARSE_HUGE parser option enabled, several integer counters can overflow. This results in an attempt to access an array at a negative 2GB offset, typically leading to a segmentation fault. Se descubrió un problema en libxml2 antes de la versión 2.10.3. Al analizar un documento XML de varios gigabytes con la opción de analizador XML_PARSE_HUGE habilitada, varios contadores de enteros pueden desbordarse. • http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2022/Dec/21 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2022/Dec/24 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2022/Dec/25 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2022/Dec/26 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2022/Dec/27 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxml2/-/commit/c846986356fc149915a74972bf198abc266bc2c0 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxml2/-/tags/v2.10.3 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20221209-0003 https://support.apple.com/kb/HT213531 https:/ • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 22EXPL: 0CVE-2022-2097 – AES OCB fails to encrypt some bytes
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2097
AES OCB mode for 32-bit x86 platforms using the AES-NI assembly optimised implementation will not encrypt the entirety of the data under some circumstances. This could reveal sixteen bytes of data that was preexisting in the memory that wasn't written. In the special case of "in place" encryption, sixteen bytes of the plaintext would be revealed. Since OpenSSL does not support OCB based cipher suites for TLS and DTLS, they are both unaffected. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.5 (Affected 3.0.0-3.0.4). • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-332410.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=919925673d6c9cfed3c1085497f5dfbbed5fc431 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=a98f339ddd7e8f487d6e0088d4a9a42324885a93 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2023/02/msg00019.html https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/R6CK57NBQFTPUMXAPJURCGXUYT76NQAK https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fe • CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •
CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 43EXPL: 0CVE-2022-1434 – Incorrect MAC key used in the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-1434
The OpenSSL 3.0 implementation of the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite incorrectly uses the AAD data as the MAC key. This makes the MAC key trivially predictable. An attacker could exploit this issue by performing a man-in-the-middle attack to modify data being sent from one endpoint to an OpenSSL 3.0 recipient such that the modified data would still pass the MAC integrity check. Note that data sent from an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint to a non-OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint will always be rejected by the recipient and the connection will fail at that point. Many application protocols require data to be sent from the client to the server first. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-953464.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=7d56a74a96828985db7354a55227a511615f732b https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20220602-0009 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20220503.txt • CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •
CVSS: 10.0EPSS: 10%CPEs: 59EXPL: 5CVE-2022-1292 – The c_rehash script allows command injection
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-1292
The c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where it is automatically executed. On such operating systems, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the script. Use of the c_rehash script is considered obsolete and should be replaced by the OpenSSL rehash command line tool. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2). • https://github.com/alcaparra/CVE-2022-1292 https://github.com/li8u99/CVE-2022-1292 https://github.com/greek0x0/CVE-2022-1292 https://github.com/rama291041610/CVE-2022-1292 https://github.com/und3sc0n0c1d0/CVE-2022-1292 https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-953464.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=1ad73b4d27bd8c1b369a3cd453681d3a4f1bb9b2 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=548d3f280a6e737673f5b61fce24bb100108dfeb https://git • CWE-77: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 43EXPL: 0CVE-2022-1343 – OCSP_basic_verify may incorrectly verify the response signing certificate
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-1343
The function `OCSP_basic_verify` verifies the signer certificate on an OCSP response. In the case where the (non-default) flag OCSP_NOCHECKS is used then the response will be positive (meaning a successful verification) even in the case where the response signing certificate fails to verify. It is anticipated that most users of `OCSP_basic_verify` will not use the OCSP_NOCHECKS flag. In this case the `OCSP_basic_verify` function will return a negative value (indicating a fatal error) in the case of a certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-953464.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=2eda98790c5c2741d76d23cc1e74b0dc4f4b391a https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20220602-0009 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20220503.txt https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2022-1343 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087911 • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation •