ID CVE-2016-5416
Summary 389 Directory Server in Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop 6 through 7, Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node 6 through 7, Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 6 through 7, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation 6 through 7 allows remote attackers to read the default Access Control Instructions.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop 6.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_desktop:6.0
  • RedHat Enterprise Linux Desktop 7.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_desktop:7.0
  • RedHat Enterprise Linux HPC Node 6.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_hpc_node:6.0
  • RedHat Enterprise Linux HPC Node 7.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_hpc_node:7.0
  • Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 6.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_server:6.0
  • RedHat Enterprise Linux Server 7.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_server:7.0
  • Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation 6.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_workstation:6.0
  • RedHat Enterprise Linux Workstation 7.0
    cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux_workstation:7.0
CVSS
Base: 5.0
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-200
CAPEC
  • Subverting Environment Variable Values
    The attacker directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The attacker's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the attacker.
  • Footprinting
    An attacker engages in probing and exploration activity to identify constituents and properties of the target. Footprinting is a general term to describe a variety of information gathering techniques, often used by attackers in preparation for some attack. It consists of using tools to learn as much as possible about the composition, configuration, and security mechanisms of the targeted application, system or network. Information that might be collected during a footprinting effort could include open ports, applications and their versions, network topology, and similar information. While footprinting is not intended to be damaging (although certain activities, such as network scans, can sometimes cause disruptions to vulnerable applications inadvertently) it may often pave the way for more damaging attacks.
  • Exploiting Trust in Client (aka Make the Client Invisible)
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by placing themselves in the communication channel between client and server such that communication directly to the server is possible where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
  • Browser Fingerprinting
    An attacker carefully crafts small snippets of Java Script to efficiently detect the type of browser the potential victim is using. Many web-based attacks need prior knowledge of the web browser including the version of browser to ensure successful exploitation of a vulnerability. Having this knowledge allows an attacker to target the victim with attacks that specifically exploit known or zero day weaknesses in the type and version of the browser used by the victim. Automating this process via Java Script as a part of the same delivery system used to exploit the browser is considered more efficient as the attacker can supply a browser fingerprinting method and integrate it with exploit code, all contained in Java Script and in response to the same web page request by the browser.
  • Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
    This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
  • Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)
    This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
  • Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding
    This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An attacker would try to exploit common filtering problems related to the use of the slashes characters to gain access to resources on the target host. Directory-driven systems, such as file systems and databases, typically use the slash character to indicate traversal between directories or other container components. For murky historical reasons, PCs (and, as a result, Microsoft OSs) choose to use a backslash, whereas the UNIX world typically makes use of the forward slash. The schizophrenic result is that many MS-based systems are required to understand both forms of the slash. This gives the attacker many opportunities to discover and abuse a number of common filtering problems. The goal of this pattern is to discover server software that only applies filters to one version, but not the other.
redhat via4
advisories
  • bugzilla
    id 1371284
    title Disabling CLEAR password storage scheme will crash server when setting a password
    oval
    AND
    • OR
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Client is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20140675001
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Server is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20140675002
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Workstation is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20140675003
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 ComputeNode is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20140675004
    • OR
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base is earlier than 0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594007
        • comment 389-ds-base is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20120813006
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base-devel is earlier than 0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594005
        • comment 389-ds-base-devel is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20120813008
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base-libs is earlier than 0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594011
        • comment 389-ds-base-libs is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20120813010
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base-snmp is earlier than 0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594009
        • comment 389-ds-base-snmp is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594010
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base-tests is earlier than 0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594013
        • comment 389-ds-base-tests is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162594014
    rhsa
    id RHSA-2016:2594
    released 2016-11-03
    severity Moderate
    title RHSA-2016:2594: 389-ds-base security, bug fix, and enhancement update (Moderate)
  • bugzilla
    id 1381153
    title Crash in import_wait_for_space_in_fifo().
    oval
    AND
    • OR
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Client is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20100842001
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Server is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20100842002
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Workstation is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20100842003
      • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 ComputeNode is installed
        oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20100842004
    • OR
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base is earlier than 0:1.2.11.15-84.el6_8
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162765005
        • comment 389-ds-base is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20120813006
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base-devel is earlier than 0:1.2.11.15-84.el6_8
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162765009
        • comment 389-ds-base-devel is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20120813008
      • AND
        • comment 389-ds-base-libs is earlier than 0:1.2.11.15-84.el6_8
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20162765007
        • comment 389-ds-base-libs is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease2 key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20120813010
    rhsa
    id RHSA-2016:2765
    released 2016-11-15
    severity Moderate
    title RHSA-2016:2765: 389-ds-base security, bug fix, and enhancement update (Moderate)
rpms
  • 389-ds-base-0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
  • 389-ds-base-devel-0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
  • 389-ds-base-libs-0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
  • 389-ds-base-snmp-0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
  • 389-ds-base-tests-0:1.3.5.10-11.el7
  • 389-ds-base-0:1.2.11.15-84.el6_8
  • 389-ds-base-devel-0:1.2.11.15-84.el6_8
  • 389-ds-base-libs-0:1.2.11.15-84.el6_8
refmap via4
bid 99097
confirm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1349540
Last major update 08-06-2017 - 15:29
Published 08-06-2017 - 15:29
Last modified 19-06-2017 - 21:29
Back to Top