CVE-2021-3450 : Detail

CVE-2021-3450

7.4
/
High
Authorization problems
A07-Identif. and Authent. Fail
0.26%V3
Network
2021-03-25
14h25 +00:00
2024-09-17
03h07 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

CA certificate check bypass with X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT

The X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT flag enables additional security checks of the certificates present in a certificate chain. It is not set by default. Starting from OpenSSL version 1.1.1h a check to disallow certificates in the chain that have explicitly encoded elliptic curve parameters was added as an additional strict check. An error in the implementation of this check meant that the result of a previous check to confirm that certificates in the chain are valid CA certificates was overwritten. This effectively bypasses the check that non-CA certificates must not be able to issue other certificates. If a "purpose" has been configured then there is a subsequent opportunity for checks that the certificate is a valid CA. All of the named "purpose" values implemented in libcrypto perform this check. Therefore, where a purpose is set the certificate chain will still be rejected even when the strict flag has been used. A purpose is set by default in libssl client and server certificate verification routines, but it can be overridden or removed by an application. In order to be affected, an application must explicitly set the X509_V_FLAG_X509_STRICT verification flag and either not set a purpose for the certificate verification or, in the case of TLS client or server applications, override the default purpose. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1h and newer are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1k. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not impacted by this issue. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1k (Affected 1.1.1h-1.1.1j).

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-295 Improper Certificate Validation
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 7.4 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

High

successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

 [email protected]
V2 5.8 AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Openssl>>Openssl >> Version From (including) 1.1.1h To (excluding) 1.1.1k

Configuraton 0

Freebsd>>Freebsd >> Version 12.2

Freebsd>>Freebsd >> Version 12.2

Freebsd>>Freebsd >> Version 12.2

Configuraton 0

Netapp>>Santricity_smi-s_provider_firmware >> Version -

Netapp>>Santricity_smi-s_provider >> Version -

Configuraton 0

Netapp>>Storagegrid_firmware >> Version -

Netapp>>Storagegrid >> Version -

Configuraton 0

Windriver>>Linux >> Version -

Windriver>>Linux >> Version 17.0

Windriver>>Linux >> Version 18.0

Windriver>>Linux >> Version 19.0

Configuraton 0

Netapp>>Cloud_volumes_ontap_mediator >> Version -

Netapp>>Oncommand_workflow_automation >> Version -

Netapp>>Ontap_select_deploy_administration_utility >> Version -

Netapp>>Storagegrid >> Version -

Configuraton 0

Fedoraproject>>Fedora >> Version 34

Configuraton 0

Tenable>>Nessus >> Version To (including) 8.13.1

Tenable>>Nessus_agent >> Version From (including) 8.2.1 To (including) 8.2.3

Tenable>>Nessus_network_monitor >> Version 5.11.0

Tenable>>Nessus_network_monitor >> Version 5.11.1

Tenable>>Nessus_network_monitor >> Version 5.12.0

Tenable>>Nessus_network_monitor >> Version 5.12.1

Tenable>>Nessus_network_monitor >> Version 5.13.0

Configuraton 0

Oracle>>Commerce_guided_search >> Version 11.3.2

Oracle>>Enterprise_manager_for_storage_management >> Version 13.4.0.0

Oracle>>Graalvm >> Version 19.3.5

Oracle>>Graalvm >> Version 20.3.1.2

Oracle>>Graalvm >> Version 21.0.0.2

Oracle>>Jd_edwards_enterpriseone_tools >> Version To (excluding) 9.2.6.0

Oracle>>Jd_edwards_world_security >> Version a9.4

Oracle>>Mysql_connectors >> Version To (including) 8.0.23

Oracle>>Mysql_enterprise_monitor >> Version To (including) 8.0.23

Oracle>>Mysql_server >> Version To (including) 5.7.33

Oracle>>Mysql_server >> Version From (including) 8.0.15 To (including) 8.0.23

Oracle>>Mysql_workbench >> Version To (including) 8.0.23

Oracle>>Peoplesoft_enterprise_peopletools >> Version From (including) 8.57 To (including) 8.59

Oracle>>Secure_backup >> Version To (excluding) 18.1.0.1.0

Oracle>>Secure_global_desktop >> Version 5.6

Oracle>>Weblogic_server >> Version 12.2.1.4.0

Oracle>>Weblogic_server >> Version 14.1.1.0.0

Configuraton 0

Mcafee>>Web_gateway >> Version 8.2.19

Mcafee>>Web_gateway >> Version 9.2.10

Mcafee>>Web_gateway >> Version 10.1.1

Mcafee>>Web_gateway_cloud_service >> Version 8.2.19

Mcafee>>Web_gateway_cloud_service >> Version 9.2.10

Mcafee>>Web_gateway_cloud_service >> Version 10.1.1

Configuraton 0

Sonicwall>>Sma100_firmware >> Version To (excluding) 10.2.1.0-17sv

Sonicwall>>Sma100 >> Version -

Configuraton 0

Sonicwall>>Capture_client >> Version To (excluding) 3.6.24

Sonicwall>>Email_security >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.11

Sonicwall>>Sonicos >> Version To (including) 7.0.1-r1456

Configuraton 0

Nodejs>>Node.js >> Version From (including) 10.0.0 To (excluding) 10.24.1

Nodejs>>Node.js >> Version From (including) 12.0.0 To (excluding) 12.22.1

Nodejs>>Node.js >> Version From (including) 14.0.0 To (excluding) 14.16.1

Nodejs>>Node.js >> Version From (including) 15.0.0 To (excluding) 15.14.0

References

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/27/1
Tags : mailing-list, x_refsource_MLIST
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/27/2
Tags : mailing-list, x_refsource_MLIST
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/28/3
Tags : mailing-list, x_refsource_MLIST
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2021/03/28/4
Tags : mailing-list, x_refsource_MLIST
https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202103-03
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_GENTOO