CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 0%CPEs: 22EXPL: 0CVE-2022-2097 – AES OCB fails to encrypt some bytes
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2097
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://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-332410.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=919925673d6c9cfed3c1085497f5dfbbed5fc431 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=a98f339ddd7e8f487d6e0088d4a9a42324885a93 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2023/02/msg00019.html https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/R6CK57NBQFTPUMXAPJURCGXUYT76NQAK https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fe • CWE-325: Missing Cryptographic Step CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm •
CVSS: 10.0EPSS: 2%CPEs: 12EXPL: 3CVE-2022-2274 – RSA implementation bug in AVX512IFMA instructions
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2274
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 machines supporting AVX512IFMA instructions of the X86_64 architecture are affected by this issue. OpenSSL versión 3.0.4, introdujo un grave error en la implementación de RSA para CPUs X86_64 que soportan las instrucciones AVX512IFMA. • https://github.com/Malwareman007/CVE-2022-2274 https://github.com/DesmondSanctity/CVE-2022-2274 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=4d8a88c134df634ba610ff8db1eb8478ac5fd345 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/18625 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20220715-0010 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20220705.txt • CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write •
CVSS: 10.0EPSS: 12%CPEs: 50EXPL: 0CVE-2022-2068 – The c_rehash script allows command injection
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-2068
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 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. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-332410.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=2c9c35870601b4a44d86ddbf512b38df38285cfa https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=7a9c027159fe9e1bbc2cd38a8a2914bff0d5abd9 https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=9639817dac8bbbaa64d09efad7464ccc405527c7 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6WZZBKUHQFGSKGNXXKICSRPL7AMVW5M5 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list • 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: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 43EXPL: 0CVE-2022-1473 – Resource leakage when decoding certificates and keys
https://notcve.org/view.php?id=CVE-2022-1473
The OPENSSL_LH_flush() function, which empties a hash table, contains a bug that breaks reuse of the memory occuppied by the removed hash table entries. This function is used when decoding certificates or keys. If a long lived process periodically decodes certificates or keys its memory usage will expand without bounds and the process might be terminated by the operating system causing a denial of service. Also traversing the empty hash table entries will take increasingly more time. Typically such long lived processes might be TLS clients or TLS servers configured to accept client certificate authentication. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-953464.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=64c85430f95200b6b51fe9475bd5203f7c19daf1 https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202210-02 https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20220602-0009 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20220503.txt https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2022-1473 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087913 • CWE-401: Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime CWE-459: Incomplete Cleanup •
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
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 certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. • https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-953464.pdf https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=2eda98790c5c2741d76d23cc1e74b0dc4f4b391a https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20220602-0009 https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20220503.txt https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2022-1343 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087911 • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation •