Page 7 of 40 results (0.039 seconds)

CVSS: 5.9EPSS: 0%CPEs: 34EXPL: 0

There is an overflow bug in the AVX2 Montgomery multiplication procedure used in exponentiation with 1024-bit moduli. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against RSA and DSA as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH1024 are considered just feasible, because most of the work necessary to deduce information about a private key may be performed offline. The amount of resources required for such an attack would be significant. • 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/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/102118 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039978 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0998 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2185 https://access.redhat.co • CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor •

CVSS: 6.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 2EXPL: 0

There is a carry propagating bug in the x86_64 Montgomery squaring procedure in OpenSSL before 1.0.2m and 1.1.0 before 1.1.0g. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against RSA and DSA as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH are considered just feasible (although very difficult) because most of the work necessary to deduce information about a private key may be performed offline. The amount of resources required for such an attack would be very significant and likely only accessible to a limited number of attackers. • 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/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/101666 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039727 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0998 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2185 https://access.redhat.co • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor CWE-682: Incorrect Calculation •

CVSS: 5.3EPSS: 2%CPEs: 102EXPL: 0

While parsing an IPAddressFamily extension in an X.509 certificate, it is possible to do a one-byte overread. This would result in an incorrect text display of the certificate. This bug has been present since 2006 and is present in all versions of OpenSSL before 1.0.2m and 1.1.0g. Al analizar una extensión IPAddressFamily en un certificado X.509, es posible realizar una sobrelectura de un bit. Esto tendría como resultado que el texto del certificado se muestre de forma incorrecta. • 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/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/100515 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039726 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3221 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3505 https://cert-portal.siem • CWE-119: Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read •

CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 3EXPL: 1

The openssl gem for Ruby uses the same initialization vector (IV) in GCM Mode (aes-*-gcm) when the IV is set before the key, which makes it easier for context-dependent attackers to bypass the encryption protection mechanism. La openssl gem para Ruby utiliza el mismo vector de inicialización (IV) en el modo GCM (aes - * - gcm) cuando el IV se establece en versiones anteriores a la clave, lo que facilita que los atacantes dependiendo del contexto eludan el mecanismo de protección del cifrado. • http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/09/19/9 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/09/30/6 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/10/01/2 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93031 https://github.com/ruby/openssl/commit/8108e0a6db133f3375608303fdd2083eb5115062 https://github.com/ruby/openssl/issues/49 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/07/msg00012.html https://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3966 • CWE-326: Inadequate Encryption Strength •

CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 52%CPEs: 87EXPL: 1

A denial of service flaw was found in OpenSSL 0.9.8, 1.0.1, 1.0.2 through 1.0.2h, and 1.1.0 in the way the TLS/SSL protocol defined processing of ALERT packets during a connection handshake. A remote attacker could use this flaw to make a TLS/SSL server consume an excessive amount of CPU and fail to accept connections from other clients. Se ha encontrado un fallo de denegación de servicio en OpenSSL en las versiones 0.9.8, 1.0.1, 1.0.2 hasta la 1.0.2h y la 1.1.0 en la forma en la que el protocolo TLS/SSL definió el procesamiento de paquetes ALERT durante una negociación de conexión. Un atacante remoto podría emplear este fallo para hacer que un servidor TLS/SSL consuma una cantidad excesiva de recursos de CPU y fracase a la hora de aceptar conexiones de otros clientes. A denial of service flaw was found in the way the TLS/SSL protocol defined processing of ALERT packets during a connection handshake. • https://github.com/cujanovic/CVE-2016-8610-PoC http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0286.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0574.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-1415.html http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-1659.html http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2016/q4/224 http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93841 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1037084 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1413 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1414 • CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption •