CVSS: 7.8EPSS: 56%CPEs: 41EXPL: 0CVE-2016-6304 – openssl: OCSP Status Request extension unbounded memory growth
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-6304
Multiple memory leaks in t1_lib.c in OpenSSL before 1.0.1u, 1.0.2 before 1.0.2i, and 1.1.0 before 1.1.0a allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via large OCSP Status Request extensions. Múltiples fugas de memoria en t1_lib.c en OpenSSL en versiones anteriores a 1.0.1u, 1.0.2 en versiones anteriores a 1.0.2i y 1.1.0 en versiones anteriores a 1.1.0a permiten a atacantes remotos provocar una denegación de servicio (consumo de memoria) a través de grandes extensiones OCSP Status Request A memory leak flaw was found in the way OpenSSL handled TLS status request extension data during session renegotiation. A remote attacker could cause a TLS server using OpenSSL to consume an excessive amount of memory and, possibly, exit unexpectedly after exhausting all available memory, if it enabled OCSP stapling support. Double-free and invalid-free vulnerabilities in x509 parsing were found in the latest OpenSSL (1.1.0b). • http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=JSA10759 http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00022.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00023.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00024.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00005.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00011.h • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption CWE-401: Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime •
CVSS: 9.8EPSS: 28%CPEs: 33EXPL: 0CVE-2016-6303
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-6303
Integer overflow in the MDC2_Update function in crypto/mdc2/mdc2dgst.c in OpenSSL before 1.1.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds write and application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via unknown vectors. Desbordamiento de entero en la función MDC2_Update en crypto/mdc2/mdc2dgst.c en OpenSSL en versiones anteriores a 1.1.0 permite a atacantes remotos provocar una denegación de servicio (escritura fuera de límites y caída de aplicación) o tener otro posible impacto no especificado a través de vectores desconocidos. • http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=JSA10759 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21995039 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2017-3236622.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2016-2881722.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2017-3236626.html http://www. • CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write •
CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 45EXPL: 1CVE-2016-2183 – SSL/TLS: Birthday attack against 64-bit block ciphers (SWEET32)
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-2183
The DES and Triple DES ciphers, as used in the TLS, SSH, and IPSec protocols and other protocols and products, have a birthday bound of approximately four billion blocks, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, as demonstrated by an HTTPS session using Triple DES in CBC mode, aka a "Sweet32" attack. Los cifrados DES y Triple DES, como se usan en los protocolos TLS, SSH e IPSec y otros protocolos y productos, tienen una cota de cumpleaños de aproximadamente cuatro mil millones de bloques, lo que facilita a atacantes remotos obtener datos de texto plano a través de un ataque de cumpleaños contra una sesión cifrada de larga duración, según lo demostrado por una sesión HTTPS usando Triple DES en modo CBC, también conocido como un ataque "Sweet32". A flaw was found in the way the DES/3DES cipher was used as part of the TLS/SSL protocol. A man-in-the-middle attacker could use this flaw to recover some plaintext data by capturing large amounts of encrypted traffic between TLS/SSL server and client if the communication used a DES/3DES based ciphersuite. IBM Informix Dynamic Server suffers from dll injection, PHP code injection, and heap buffer overflow vulnerabilities. • http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=JSA10759 http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00022.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00023.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00024.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00005.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00011.h • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •
CVSS: 5.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 45EXPL: 0CVE-2016-2178 – openssl: Non-constant time codepath followed for certain operations in DSA implementation
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-2178
The dsa_sign_setup function in crypto/dsa/dsa_ossl.c in OpenSSL through 1.0.2h does not properly ensure the use of constant-time operations, which makes it easier for local users to discover a DSA private key via a timing side-channel attack. La función dsa_sign_setup en crypto/dsa/dsa_ossl.c en OpenSSL hasta la versión 1.0.2h no asegura correctamente la utilización de operaciones de tiempo constante, lo que facilita a usuarios locales descubrir una clave privada DSA a través de un ataque de sincronización de canal lateral. It was discovered that OpenSSL did not always use constant time operations when computing Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA) signatures. A local attacker could possibly use this flaw to obtain a private DSA key belonging to another user or service running on the same system. • http://eprint.iacr.org/2016/594.pdf http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=JSA10759 http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00022.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00023.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00024.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-09/msg00031.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-10/msg00005.html http://lists.opensuse.org& • CWE-203: Observable Discrepancy CWE-385: Covert Timing Channel •
CVSS: 9.3EPSS: 3%CPEs: 13EXPL: 0CVE-2016-1669 – V8: integer overflow leading to buffer overflow in Zone::New
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2016-1669
The Zone::New function in zone.cc in Google V8 before 5.0.71.47, as used in Google Chrome before 50.0.2661.102, does not properly determine when to expand certain memory allocations, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (buffer overflow) or possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted JavaScript code. La función Zone::New en zone.cc en Google V8 en versiones anteriores a 5.0.71.47, tal como se utiliza en Google Chrome en versiones anteriores a 50.0.2661.102, no determina correctamente cuándo expandir ciertas asignaciones de memoria, lo que permite a atacantes remotos provocar una denegación de servicio (desbordamiento de buffer) o posiblemente tener otro impacto no especificado a través de código JavaScript manipulado. An integer-overflow flaw was found in V8's Zone class when allocating new memory (Zone::New() and Zone::NewExpand()). An attacker with the ability to manipulate a large zone could crash the application or, potentially, execute arbitrary code with the application privileges. • http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2016/05/stable-channel-update.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00043.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-05/msg00050.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2016-06/msg00048.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-updates/2016-07/msg00063.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1080.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0002.html http://www.debian.org/security/ • CWE-119: Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound •