CVSS: 7.4EPSS: 85%CPEs: 9EXPL: 0CVE-2023-0286 – X.400 address type confusion in X.509 GeneralName
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2023-0286
07 Feb 2023 — There is a type confusion vulnerability relating to X.400 address processing inside an X.509 GeneralName. X.400 addresses were parsed as an ASN1_STRING but the public structure definition for GENERAL_NAME incorrectly specified the type of the x400Address field as ASN1_TYPE. This field is subsequently interpreted by the OpenSSL function GENERAL_NAME_cmp as an ASN1_TYPE rather than an ASN1_STRING. When CRL checking is enabled (i.e. the application sets the X509_V_FLAG_CRL_CHECK flag), this vulnerability may a... • https://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/LibreSSL/libressl-3.6.2-relnotes.txt • CWE-704: Incorrect Type Conversion or Cast CWE-843: Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion') •
CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 0%CPEs: 1EXPL: 0CVE-2022-3996 – X.509 Policy Constraints Double Locking
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-3996
13 Dec 2022 — If an X.509 certificate contains a malformed policy constraint and policy processing is enabled, then a write lock will be taken twice recursively. On some operating systems (most widely: Windows) this results in a denial of service when the affected process hangs. Policy processing being enabled on a publicly facing server is not considered to be a common setup. Policy processing is enabled by passing the `-policy' argument to the command line utilities or by calling the `X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_policies()'... • https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/7725e7bfe6f2ce8146b6552b44e0d226be7638e7 • CWE-667: Improper Locking •
CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 15%CPEs: 6EXPL: 2CVE-2022-3786 – X.509 Email Address Variable Length Buffer Overflow
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-3786
01 Nov 2022 — A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed a malicious certificate or for an application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address in a certificate to overflow an arbitrary number of bytes containing the `.' character (decimal 46) on t... • https://github.com/cybersecurityworks553/CVE-2022-3602-and-CVE-2022-3786 • CWE-120: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') CWE-193: Off-by-one Error •
CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 84%CPEs: 9EXPL: 8CVE-2022-3602 – X.509 Email Address 4-byte Buffer Overflow
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-3602
01 Nov 2022 — A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed the malicious certificate or for the application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address to overflow four attacker-controlled bytes on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash... • https://github.com/colmmacc/CVE-2022-3602 • CWE-121: Stack-based Buffer Overflow CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write •
CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 15%CPEs: 1EXPL: 0CVE-2022-3358 – Using a Custom Cipher with NID_undef may lead to NULL encryption
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-3358
11 Oct 2022 — OpenSSL supports creating a custom cipher via the legacy EVP_CIPHER_meth_new() function and associated function calls. This function was deprecated in OpenSSL 3.0 and application authors are instead encouraged to use the new provider mechanism in order to implement custom ciphers. OpenSSL versions 3.0.0 to 3.0.5 incorrectly handle legacy custom ciphers passed to the EVP_EncryptInit_ex2(), EVP_DecryptInit_ex2() and EVP_CipherInit_ex2() functions (as well as other similarly named encryption and decryption ini... • https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=5485c56679d7c49b96e8fc8ca708b0b7e7c03c4b • CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference •
CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 22EXPL: 1CVE-2022-2097 – AES OCB fails to encrypt some bytes
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2097
05 Jul 2022 — 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://github.com/PeterThomasAwen/OpenSSLUpgrade1.1.1q-Ubuntu • CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •
CVSS: 10.0EPSS: 58%CPEs: 12EXPL: 4CVE-2022-2274 – RSA implementation bug in AVX512IFMA instructions
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2274
01 Jul 2022 — The OpenSSL 3.0.4 release introduced a serious bug in the RSA implementation for X86_64 CPUs supporting the AVX512IFMA instructions. This issue makes the RSA implementation with 2048 bit private keys incorrect on such machines and memory corruption will happen during the computation. As a consequence of the memory corruption an attacker may be able to trigger a remote code execution on the machine performing the computation. SSL/TLS servers or other servers using 2048 bit RSA private keys running on machine... • https://github.com/Malwareman007/CVE-2022-2274 • CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write •
CVSS: 10.0EPSS: 71%CPEs: 50EXPL: 1CVE-2022-2068 – The c_rehash script allows command injection
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2068
21 Jun 2022 — In addition to the c_rehash shell command injection identified in CVE-2022-1292, further circumstances where the c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection were found by code review. When the CVE-2022-1292 was fixed it was not discovered that there are other places in the script where the file names of certificates being hashed were possibly passed to a command executed through the shell. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where... • https://packetstorm.news/files/id/182466 • 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: 10.0EPSS: 76%CPEs: 59EXPL: 5CVE-2022-1292 – The c_rehash script allows command injection
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-1292
03 May 2022 — 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 • 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
03 May 2022 — 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 certif... • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-953464.pdf • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation •