CVE-2018-5741

Score / Gravité

6.5

Moyen

Catégories

Authorization problems

OWSAP

A01-Broken Access Control

EPSS

0.44%V4

Vecteur

Network

Publié

2019-01-16
20h00 +00:00

Modifié

2024-09-17
02h26 +00:00

Liens officiels

CVE.org

NVD

Notifications pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.

Gestion des notifications

Liste des Notifications

Notifications pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.

Critères appliqués l'envoi de l'alerte : par rapport à la dernière alerte envoyée + différences au niveau de CISA, EPSS, CVSS, CWE, Solutions, CPE.

Paramètres

Vous pouvez spécifier un titre qui sera récupéré dans les alertes qui seront envoyées.

Spécifiez ici un CVE ID comme CVE-2025-1234

Planifications

Mois

Prochaine exécution calculée

Jour

Jour de la semaine

Heure

Minute

Date de création

Dernière exécution

Prochaine exécution

Fonctionnalité nécessitant une connexion

Cette fonctionnalité qui vous permet de recevoir des alertes, n'est active que lorsque vous êtes connecté à votre compte.

Descriptions du CVE

Update policies krb5-subdomain and ms-subdomain do not enforce controls promised in their documentation

To provide fine-grained controls over the ability to use Dynamic DNS (DDNS) to update records in a zone, BIND 9 provides a feature called update-policy. Various rules can be configured to limit the types of updates that can be performed by a client, depending on the key used when sending the update request. Unfortunately, some rule types were not initially documented, and when documentation for them was added to the Administrator Reference Manual (ARM) in change #3112, the language that was added to the ARM at that time incorrectly described the behavior of two rule types, krb5-subdomain and ms-subdomain. This incorrect documentation could mislead operators into believing that policies they had configured were more restrictive than they actually were. This affects BIND versions prior to BIND 9.11.5 and BIND 9.12.3.

Solutions du CVE

At the time of public disclosure, ISC is not providing any code changing the behavior of the update-policy feature. While we believe that there are a few operators out there who are relying on the strictest interpretation permitted by the erroneous documentation, we have to balance that against changing the behavior of features in stable branches of BIND, including the 9.11 branch which is meant to be a feature-complete Extended Support Version of BIND 9. As a compromise between these conflicting priorities, we have decided that our best course of action is to disclose the error but leave the existing behavior of the krb5-subdomain and ms-subdomain policies as they are (while correcting the erroneous documentation). In maintenance releases issued during or after October 2018, the name field for ms-subdomain and krb5-subdomain will be corrected so that names lower than "." can be configured, and two new rule types will be added, krb5-selfsub and ms-selfsub, analogous to the existing selfsub rule type, which implement the behavior that was formerly described in the documentation for krb5-subdomain and ms-subdomain: restricting updates to names at or below the machine name encoded in the client's Windows or Kerberos principal.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID	Nom de la faiblesse	Source
CWE-863	Incorrect Authorization The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

Métriques

Métriques	Score	Gravité	CVSS Vecteur	Source
V3.0	6.5	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N More informations 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 A vulnerability exploitable with network access means the vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the attacker's path is through OSI layer 3 (the network layer). Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable one or more network hops away (e.g. across layer 3 boundaries from 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 against the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker is authorized with (i.e. requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a 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 An important property captured by CVSS v3.0 is the ability for a vulnerability in one software component to impact resources beyond its means, or privileges. Scope Formally, Scope refers to the collection of privileges defined by a computing authority (e.g. an application, an operating system, or a sandbox environment) when granting access to computing resources (e.g. files, CPU, memory, etc). These privileges are assigned based on some method of identification and authorization. In some cases, the authorization may be simple or loosely controlled based upon predefined rules or standards. For example, in the case of Ethernet traffic sent to a network switch, the switch accepts traffic that arrives on its ports and is an authority that controls the traffic flow to other switch ports. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same authority. In this case the vulnerable component and the impacted component are the same. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics refer to the properties of the impacted component. 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. 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 that one has in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics
V2	4		AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N	nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

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

Score EPSS

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.

Date	EPSS V0	EPSS V1	EPSS V2 (> 2022-02-04)	EPSS V3 (> 2025-03-07)	EPSS V4 (> 2025-03-17)
2021-04-18	2.07%	–	–	–	–
2021-09-05	–	2.07%	–	–	–
2021-10-17	–	2.07%	–	–	–
2022-01-09	–	2.07%	–	–	–
2022-02-06	–	–	2.81%	–	–
2022-03-13	–	–	2.81%	–	–
2022-04-03	–	–	2.81%	–	–
2022-04-17	–	–	2.81%	–	–
2022-10-09	–	–	2.81%	–	–
2023-03-12	–	–	–	0.34%	–
2023-07-16	–	–	–	0.34%	–
2024-01-14	–	–	–	0.34%	–
2024-02-11	–	–	–	0.32%	–
2024-06-02	–	–	–	0.32%	–
2024-06-09	–	–	–	0.32%	–
2024-12-22	–	–	–	0.56%	–
2025-01-19	–	–	–	0.56%	–
2025-03-18	–	–	–	–	0.46%
2025-03-30	–	–	–	–	0.46%
2025-04-06	–	–	–	–	0.46%
2025-04-15	–	–	–	–	0.46%
2025-04-22	–	–	–	–	0.44%
2025-04-22	–	–	–	–	0.44,%

Percentile EPSS

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

Date	Percentile
2021-04-18	–
2021-09-05	77%
2021-10-17	78%
2022-01-09	5%
2022-02-06	64%
2022-03-13	65%
2022-04-03	81%
2022-04-17	82%
2022-10-09	83%
2023-03-12	67%
2023-07-16	68%
2024-01-14	69%
2024-02-11	7%
2024-06-02	7%
2024-06-09	71%
2024-12-22	78%
2025-01-19	78%
2025-03-18	62%
2025-03-30	61%
2025-04-06	62%
2025-04-15	63%
2025-04-22	62%
2025-04-22	62%