Page 6 of 36 results (0.012 seconds)

CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 18EXPL: 0

There is an overflow bug in the x64_64 Montgomery squaring procedure used in exponentiation with 512-bit moduli. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against 2-prime RSA1024, 3-prime RSA1536, and DSA1024 as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH512 are considered just feasible. However, for an attack the target would have to re-use the DH512 private key, which is not recommended anyway. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2020-01/msg00030.html http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/155754/Slackware-Security-Advisory-openssl-Updates.html https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=419102400a2811582a7a3d4a4e317d72e5ce0a8f https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=f1c5eea8a817075d31e43f5876993c6710238c98 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2022/03/msg00023.html https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/messag • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound •

CVSS: 5.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 0

Normally in OpenSSL EC groups always have a co-factor present and this is used in side channel resistant code paths. However, in some cases, it is possible to construct a group using explicit parameters (instead of using a named curve). In those cases it is possible that such a group does not have the cofactor present. This can occur even where all the parameters match a known named curve. If such a curve is used then OpenSSL falls back to non-side channel resistant code paths which may result in full key recovery during an ECDSA signature operation. • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00054.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00072.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00012.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00016.html http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/154467/Slackware-Security-Advisory-openssl-Updates.html https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.01785 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=21c856b75d81eff61aa63b4f036b • CWE-602: Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security •

CVSS: 4.3EPSS: 3%CPEs: 3EXPL: 0

In situations where an attacker receives automated notification of the success or failure of a decryption attempt an attacker, after sending a very large number of messages to be decrypted, can recover a CMS/PKCS7 transported encryption key or decrypt any RSA encrypted message that was encrypted with the public RSA key, using a Bleichenbacher padding oracle attack. Applications are not affected if they use a certificate together with the private RSA key to the CMS_decrypt or PKCS7_decrypt functions to select the correct recipient info to decrypt. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0l (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2t (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2s). • http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00054.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00072.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00012.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-10/msg00016.html http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/154467/Slackware-Security-Advisory-openssl-Updates.html https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=08229ad838c50f644d7e928e2eef147b4308ad64 https://git.openssl.org/g • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-203: Observable Discrepancy CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •

CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 2%CPEs: 1EXPL: 0

OpenSSL 1.1.1 introduced a rewritten random number generator (RNG). This was intended to include protection in the event of a fork() system call in order to ensure that the parent and child processes did not share the same RNG state. However this protection was not being used in the default case. A partial mitigation for this issue is that the output from a high precision timer is mixed into the RNG state so the likelihood of a parent and child process sharing state is significantly reduced. If an application already calls OPENSSL_init_crypto() explicitly using OPENSSL_INIT_ATFORK then this problem does not occur at all. • https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=1b0fe00e2704b5e20334a16d3c9099d1ba2ef1be https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/GY6SNRJP2S7Y42GIIDO3HXPNMDYN2U3A https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZN4VVQJ3JDCHGIHV4Y2YTXBYQZ6PWQ7E https://seclists.org/bugtraq/2019/Oct/1 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20190919-0002 https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K44070243 https://support.f5.com/csp/article&# • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-330: Use of Insufficiently Random Values •

CVSS: 3.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 0

OpenSSL has internal defaults for a directory tree where it can find a configuration file as well as certificates used for verification in TLS. This directory is most commonly referred to as OPENSSLDIR, and is configurable with the --prefix / --openssldir configuration options. For OpenSSL versions 1.1.0 and 1.1.1, the mingw configuration targets assume that resulting programs and libraries are installed in a Unix-like environment and the default prefix for program installation as well as for OPENSSLDIR should be '/usr/local'. However, mingw programs are Windows programs, and as such, find themselves looking at sub-directories of 'C:/usr/local', which may be world writable, which enables untrusted users to modify OpenSSL's default configuration, insert CA certificates, modify (or even replace) existing engine modules, etc. For OpenSSL 1.0.2, '/usr/local/ssl' is used as default for OPENSSLDIR on all Unix and Windows targets, including Visual C builds. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-412672.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=54aa9d51b09d67e90db443f682cface795f5af9e https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=b15a19c148384e73338aa7c5b12652138e35ed28 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=d333ebaf9c77332754a9d5e111e2f53e1de54fdd https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=e32bc855a81a2d48d215c506bdeb4f598045f7e9 https://kc.mcafee.com/corporate/index? • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation •