English
Français
Light
Dark
System

CVEFind - Alertes CVE

Restez informé en continue
Créer un compte Ouvrez un compte Simple et Gratuit Se connecter Gérez vos alertes

CVE-2015-3195 : Détail

CVE-2015-3195

5.3
/
MEDIUM
A01-Broken Access Control
2.34%V3
Network
2015-12-05 23:00 +00:00
2022-12-12 23:00 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD

Alerte pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des alertes

Descriptions

The ASN1_TFLG_COMBINE implementation in crypto/asn1/tasn_dec.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8zh, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0t, 1.0.1 before 1.0.1q, and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2e mishandles errors caused by malformed X509_ATTRIBUTE data, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information from process memory by triggering a decoding failure in a PKCS#7 or CMS application.

Informations

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.

Metrics

Metric Score Sévérité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 5.3 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

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.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

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.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

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

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

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

Low

Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to 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 AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

EPSS Score

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

EPSS Percentile

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Apple>>Mac_os_x >> Version To (excluding) 10.11.4

Configuraton 0

Oracle>>Api_gateway >> Version 11.1.2.3.0

Oracle>>Api_gateway >> Version 11.1.2.4.0

Oracle>>Communications_webrtc_session_controller >> Version 7.0

Oracle>>Communications_webrtc_session_controller >> Version 7.1

Oracle>>Communications_webrtc_session_controller >> Version 7.2

Oracle>>Exalogic_infrastructure >> Version 1.0

Oracle>>Exalogic_infrastructure >> Version 2.0

Oracle>>Http_server >> Version 11.5.10.2

Oracle>>Life_sciences_data_hub >> Version 2.1

Oracle>>Sun_ray_software >> Version 11.1

Oracle>>Transportation_management >> Version 6.1

Oracle>>Transportation_management >> Version 6.2

Oracle>>Vm_server >> Version 3.2

Oracle>>Vm_virtualbox >> Version To (excluding) 4.3.36

Oracle>>Vm_virtualbox >> Version From (including) 5.0.0 To (excluding) 5.0.14

Oracle>>Integrated_lights_out_manager_firmware >> Version From (including) 3.0 To (including) 4.0.4

Oracle>>Linux >> Version 5

Oracle>>Linux >> Version 6

Oracle>>Linux >> Version 7

Oracle>>Solaris >> Version 10

Oracle>>Solaris >> Version 11.3

Configuraton 0

Openssl>>Openssl >> Version To (excluding) 0.9.8zh

Openssl>>Openssl >> Version From (including) 1.0.0 To (excluding) 1.0.0t

Openssl>>Openssl >> Version From (including) 1.0.1 To (excluding) 1.0.1q

Openssl>>Openssl >> Version From (including) 1.0.2 To (excluding) 1.0.2e

Configuraton 0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_desktop >> Version 5.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_desktop >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_desktop >> Version 7.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server >> Version 5.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server >> Version 7.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.2

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.3

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.4

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.6

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.7

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.2

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.3

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.6

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.7

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_workstation >> Version 5.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_workstation >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_workstation >> Version 7.0

Configuraton 0

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 12.04

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 14.04

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 15.04

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 15.10

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 7.0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 8.0

Configuraton 0

Opensuse>>Leap >> Version 42.1

Opensuse>>Opensuse >> Version 11.4

Opensuse>>Opensuse >> Version 13.1

Opensuse>>Opensuse >> Version 13.2

Suse>>Linux_enterprise_server >> Version 10

Configuraton 0

Fedoraproject>>Fedora >> Version 22

References

https://support.apple.com/HT206167
Tags : Third Party Advisory

Plus d'informations
Cliquez sur le bouton à gauche (OFF), pour autoriser l'inscription de cookie améliorant les fonctionnalités du site. Cliquez sur le bouton à gauche (Tout accepter), pour ne plus autoriser l'inscription de cookie améliorant les fonctionnalités du site.