CWE-332 Detail

CWE-332

Insufficient Entropy in PRNG
Medium
Draft
2006-07-19
00h00 +00:00
2024-02-29
00h00 +00:00
Notifications for a CWE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CWE.
Notifications manage

Name: Insufficient Entropy in PRNG

The lack of entropy available for, or used by, a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) can be a stability and security threat.

General Informations

Modes Of Introduction

Architecture and Design
Implementation : REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.

Applicable Platforms

Language

Class: Not Language-Specific (Undetermined)

Common Consequences

Scope Impact Likelihood
AvailabilityDoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Note: If a pseudo-random number generator is using a limited entropy source which runs out (if the generator fails closed), the program may pause or crash.
Access Control
Other
Bypass Protection Mechanism, Other

Note: If a PRNG is using a limited entropy source which runs out, and the generator fails open, the generator could produce predictable random numbers. Potentially a weak source of random numbers could weaken the encryption method used for authentication of users.

Observed Examples

References Description

[REF-1374]

Chain: JavaScript-based cryptocurrency library can fall back to the insecure Math.random() function instead of reporting a failure (CWE-392), thus reducing the entropy (CWE-332) and leading to generation of non-unique cryptographic keys for Bitcoin wallets (CWE-1391)

CVE-2019-1715

security product has insufficient entropy in the DRBG, allowing collisions and private key discovery

Potential Mitigations

Phases : Architecture and Design // Requirements
Use products or modules that conform to FIPS 140-2 [REF-267] to avoid obvious entropy problems. Consult FIPS 140-2 Annex C ("Approved Random Number Generators").
Phases : Implementation
Consider a PRNG that re-seeds itself as needed from high-quality pseudo-random output, such as hardware devices.
Phases : Architecture and Design
When deciding which PRNG to use, look at its sources of entropy. Depending on what your security needs are, you may need to use a random number generator that always uses strong random data -- i.e., a random number generator that attempts to be strong but will fail in a weak way or will always provide some middle ground of protection through techniques like re-seeding. Generally, something that always provides a predictable amount of strength is preferable.

Vulnerability Mapping Notes

Justification : This CWE entry is at the Variant level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.
Comment : Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.

NotesNotes

As of CWE 4.5, terminology related to randomness, entropy, and predictability can vary widely. Within the developer and other communities, "randomness" is used heavily. However, within cryptography, "entropy" is distinct, typically implied as a measurement. There are no commonly-used definitions, even within standards documents and cryptography papers. Future versions of CWE will attempt to define these terms and, if necessary, distinguish between them in ways that are appropriate for different communities but do not reduce the usability of CWE for mapping, understanding, or other scenarios.

References

REF-267

SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR CRYPTOGRAPHIC MODULES
Information Technology Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology.
https://csrc.nist.gov/csrc/media/publications/fips/140/2/final/documents/fips1402.pdf

REF-18

The CLASP Application Security Process
Secure Software, Inc..
https://cwe.mitre.org/documents/sources/TheCLASPApplicationSecurityProcess.pdf

REF-1374

Randstorm: You Can't Patch a House of Cards
Unciphered.
https://www.unciphered.com/blog/randstorm-you-cant-patch-a-house-of-cards

Submission

Name Organization Date Date release Version
CLASP 2006-07-19 +00:00 2006-07-19 +00:00 Draft 3

Modifications

Name Organization Date Comment
Eric Dalci Cigital 2008-07-01 +00:00 updated Time_of_Introduction
CWE Content Team MITRE 2008-09-08 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-03-10 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-12-28 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2010-06-21 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2011-06-01 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2011-09-13 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations, References
CWE Content Team MITRE 2012-05-11 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2015-12-07 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2017-11-08 +00:00 updated Applicable_Platforms, Modes_of_Introduction, References, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2019-01-03 +00:00 updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2019-06-20 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2020-02-24 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2021-03-15 +00:00 updated References
CWE Content Team MITRE 2021-07-20 +00:00 updated Maintenance_Notes
CWE Content Team MITRE 2021-10-28 +00:00 updated Observed_Examples
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-04-27 +00:00 updated References, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-06-29 +00:00 updated Mapping_Notes
CWE Content Team MITRE 2024-02-29 +00:00 updated Observed_Examples, References