Page 3 of 42 results (0.055 seconds)

CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 13EXPL: 0

Issue summary: A bug has been identified in the processing of key and initialisation vector (IV) lengths. This can lead to potential truncation or overruns during the initialisation of some symmetric ciphers. Impact summary: A truncation in the IV can result in non-uniqueness, which could result in loss of confidentiality for some cipher modes. When calling EVP_EncryptInit_ex2(), EVP_DecryptInit_ex2() or EVP_CipherInit_ex2() the provided OSSL_PARAM array is processed after the key and IV have been established. Any alterations to the key length, via the "keylen" parameter or the IV length, via the "ivlen" parameter, within the OSSL_PARAM array will not take effect as intended, potentially causing truncation or overreading of these values. The following ciphers and cipher modes are impacted: RC2, RC4, RC5, CCM, GCM and OCB. For the CCM, GCM and OCB cipher modes, truncation of the IV can result in loss of confidentiality. For example, when following NIST's SP 800-38D section 8.2.1 guidance for constructing a deterministic IV for AES in GCM mode, truncation of the counter portion could lead to IV reuse. Both truncations and overruns of the key and overruns of the IV will produce incorrect results and could, in some cases, trigger a memory exception. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/10/24/1 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=0df40630850fb2740e6be6890bb905d3fc623b2d https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=5f69f5c65e483928c4b28ed16af6e5742929f1ee https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20231027-0010 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240201-0003 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240201-0004 https://www.debian.org/security/2023/dsa-5532 https://www.openssl.org/news/ • CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step CWE-684: Incorrect Provision of Specified Functionality •

CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 0

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 • CWE-440: Expected Behavior Violation •

CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 70EXPL: 0

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-606: Unchecked Input for Loop Condition CWE-834: Excessive Iteration •

CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 5EXPL: 0

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-606: Unchecked Input for Loop Condition CWE-1333: Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity •

CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 4EXPL: 0

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. 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 misled 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. • 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 CWE-354: Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value •