CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 0CVE-2023-4807 – POLY1305 MAC implementation corrupts XMM registers on Windows
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2023-4807
Issue summary: The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation contains a bug that might corrupt the internal state of applications on the Windows 64 platform when running on newer X86_64 processors supporting the AVX512-IFMA instructions. Impact summary: If in an application that uses the OpenSSL library an attacker can influence whether the POLY1305 MAC algorithm is used, the application state might be corrupted with various application dependent consequences. The POLY1305 MAC (message authentication code) implementation in OpenSSL does not save the contents of non-volatile XMM registers on Windows 64 platform when calculating the MAC of data larger than 64 bytes. Before returning to the caller all the XMM registers are set to zero rather than restoring their previous content. The vulnerable code is used only on newer x86_64 processors supporting the AVX512-IFMA instructions. The consequences of this kind of internal application state corruption can be various - from no consequences, if the calling application does not depend on the contents of non-volatile XMM registers at all, to the worst consequences, where the attacker could get complete control of the application process. However given the contents of the registers are just zeroized so the attacker cannot put arbitrary values inside, the most likely consequence, if any, would be an incorrect result of some application dependent calculations or a crash leading to a denial of service. The POLY1305 MAC algorithm is most frequently used as part of the CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data) algorithm. The most common usage of this AEAD cipher is with TLS protocol versions 1.2 and 1.3 and a malicious client can influence whether this AEAD cipher is used by the server. • https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=4bfac4471f53c4f74c8d81020beb938f92d84ca5 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=6754de4a121ec7f261b16723180df6592cbb4508 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=a632d534c73eeb3e3db8c7540d811194ef7c79ff https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20230921-0001 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20230908.txt •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 70EXPL: 0CVE-2023-3817 – Excessive time spent checking DH q parameter value
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2023-3817
Issue summary: Checking excessively long DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_check(), DH_check_ex() or EVP_PKEY_param_check() to check a DH key or DH 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 function DH_check() performs various checks on DH parameters. After fixing CVE-2023-3446 it was discovered that a large q parameter value can also trigger an overly long computation during some of these checks. A correct q value, if present, cannot be larger than the modulus p parameter, thus it is unnecessary to perform these checks if q is larger than p. An application that calls DH_check() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. The function DH_check() is itself called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_ex() and EVP_PKEY_param_check(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL dhparam 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 not affected by this issue. A vulnerability was found in OpenSSL. • http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2023/Jul/43 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/31/1 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/09/22/11 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/09/22/9 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/11/06/2 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=6a1eb62c29db6cb5eec707f9338aee00f44e26f5 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=869ad69aadd985c7b8ca6f4e5dd0eb274c9f3644 https: • CWE-834: Excessive Iteration •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 5EXPL: 0CVE-2023-3446 – Excessive time spent checking DH keys and parameters
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2023-3446
Issue summary: Checking excessively long DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_check(), DH_check_ex() or EVP_PKEY_param_check() to check a DH key or DH 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 function DH_check() performs various checks on DH parameters. One of those checks confirms that the modulus ('p' parameter) is not too large. Trying to use a very large modulus is slow and OpenSSL will not normally use a modulus which is over 10,000 bits in length. However the DH_check() function checks numerous aspects of the key or parameters that have been supplied. Some of those checks use the supplied modulus value even if it has already been found to be too large. An application that calls DH_check() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulernable to a Denial of Service attack. The function DH_check() is itself called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_ex() and EVP_PKEY_param_check(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL dhparam 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 not affected by this issue. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/19/4 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/19/5 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/19/6 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/31/1 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/05/16/1 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=1fa20cf2f506113c761777127a38bce5068740eb https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=8780a896543a654e757db1b9396383f9d • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-1333: Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 4EXPL: 0CVE-2023-2975 – AES-SIV implementation ignores empty associated data entries
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2023-2975
Issue summary: The AES-SIV cipher implementation contains a bug that causes it to ignore empty associated data entries which are unauthenticated as a consequence. Impact summary: Applications that use the AES-SIV algorithm and want to authenticate empty data entries as associated data can be mislead by removing adding or reordering such empty entries as these are ignored by the OpenSSL implementation. We are currently unaware of any such applications. The AES-SIV algorithm allows for authentication of multiple associated data entries along with the encryption. To authenticate empty data the application has to call EVP_EncryptUpdate() (or EVP_CipherUpdate()) with NULL pointer as the output buffer and 0 as the input buffer length. The AES-SIV implementation in OpenSSL just returns success for such a call instead of performing the associated data authentication operation. The empty data thus will not be authenticated. As this issue does not affect non-empty associated data authentication and we expect it to be rare for an application to use empty associated data entries this is qualified as Low severity issue. A vulnerability was found in OpenSSL. The AES-SIV cipher implementation contains a bug that causes it to ignore empty associated data entries, which are unauthenticated as a consequence. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/15/1 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/19/5 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=00e2f5eea29994d19293ec4e8c8775ba73678598 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=6a83f0c958811f07e0d11dfc6b5a6a98edfd5bdc https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202402-08 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20230725-0004 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20230714.txt https://access.redhat.com/securi • CWE-287: Improper Authentication •
CVSS: 6.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 6EXPL: 0CVE-2023-2650 – Possible DoS translating ASN.1 object identifiers
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2023-2650
Issue summary: Processing some specially crafted ASN.1 object identifiers or data containing them may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use OBJ_obj2txt() directly, or use any of the OpenSSL subsystems OCSP, PKCS7/SMIME, CMS, CMP/CRMF or TS with no message size limit may experience notable to very long delays when processing those messages, which may lead to a Denial of Service. An OBJECT IDENTIFIER is composed of a series of numbers - sub-identifiers - most of which have no size limit. OBJ_obj2txt() may be used to translate an ASN.1 OBJECT IDENTIFIER given in DER encoding form (using the OpenSSL type ASN1_OBJECT) to its canonical numeric text form, which are the sub-identifiers of the OBJECT IDENTIFIER in decimal form, separated by periods. When one of the sub-identifiers in the OBJECT IDENTIFIER is very large (these are sizes that are seen as absurdly large, taking up tens or hundreds of KiBs), the translation to a decimal number in text may take a very long time. The time complexity is O(n^2) with 'n' being the size of the sub-identifiers in bytes (*). With OpenSSL 3.0, support to fetch cryptographic algorithms using names / identifiers in string form was introduced. This includes using OBJECT IDENTIFIERs in canonical numeric text form as identifiers for fetching algorithms. Such OBJECT IDENTIFIERs may be received through the ASN.1 structure AlgorithmIdentifier, which is commonly used in multiple protocols to specify what cryptographic algorithm should be used to sign or verify, encrypt or decrypt, or digest passed data. Applications that call OBJ_obj2txt() directly with untrusted data are affected, with any version of OpenSSL. If the use is for the mere purpose of display, the severity is considered low. In OpenSSL 3.0 and newer, this affects the subsystems OCSP, PKCS7/SMIME, CMS, CMP/CRMF or TS. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/05/30/1 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=423a2bc737a908ad0c77bda470b2b59dc879936b https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=853c5e56ee0b8650c73140816bb8b91d6163422c https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=9e209944b35cf82368071f160a744b6178f9b098 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=db779b0e10b047f2585615e0b8f2acdf21f8544a https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2023/06/msg00011.html • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling •