ID CVE-2017-17428
Summary Cavium Nitrox SSL, Nitrox V SSL, and TurboSSL software development kits (SDKs) allow remote attackers to decrypt TLS ciphertext data by leveraging a Bleichenbacher RSA padding oracle, aka a ROBOT attack.
Vulnerable Configurations
  • cpe:2.3:a:cavium:nitrox_ssl_sdk:6.1.0
  • cpe:2.3:a:cavium:nitrox_v_ssl_sdk:1.2
  • cpe:2.3:a:cavium:octeon_sdk:1.7.2
  • cpe:2.3:a:cavium:octeon_ssl_sdk:1.5.0
  • cpe:2.3:a:cavium:turbossl_sdk:1.0
  • cpe:2.3:a:cisco:webex_conect_im:7.24.1
  • Cisco Webex Meetings T31
  • Cisco WebEx Meetings T32
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:ace4710_application_control_engine_firmware:3.0%280%29a5%282.0%29
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:ace4710_application_control_engine_firmware:3.0%280%29a5%283.0%29
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:ace4710_application_control_engine_firmware:3.0%280%29a5%283.5%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:ace_4710_application_control_engine
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:ace30_application_control_engine_module_firmware:3.0%280%29a5%282.0%29
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:ace30_application_control_engine_module_firmware:3.0%280%29a5%283.0%29
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:ace30_application_control_engine_module_firmware:3.0%280%29a5%283.5%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:ace30_application_control_engine_module
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5520_firmware:9.1%287.16%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5520
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5540_firmware:9.1%287.16%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5540
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5550_firmware:9.1%287.16%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5550
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5510_firmware:9.1%287.16%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5510
  • cpe:2.3:o:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5505_firmware:9.1%287.16%29
  • cpe:2.3:h:cisco:adaptive_security_appliance_5505
Base: 7.1
  • 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.
metasploit via4
description Some TLS implementations handle errors processing RSA key exchanges and encryption (PKCS #1 v1.5 messages) in a broken way that leads an adaptive chosen-chiphertext attack. Attackers cannot recover a server's private key, but they can decrypt and sign messages with it. A strong oracle occurs when the TLS server does not strictly check message formatting and needs less than a million requests on average to decode a given ciphertext. A weak oracle server strictly checks message formatting and often requires many more requests to perform the attack. This module requires Python 3 with the gmpy2 and cryptography packages to be present.
last seen 2019-03-26
modified 1976-01-01
published 1976-01-01
reliability Normal
reporter Rapid7
title Scanner for Bleichenbacher Oracle in RSA PKCS #1 v1.5
nessus via4
NASL family General
description The remote host is affected by an information disclosure vulnerability. The SSL/TLS service supports RSA key exchanges, and incorrectly leaks whether or not the RSA key exchange sent by a client was correctly formatted. This information can allow an attacker to decrypt previous SSL/TLS sessions or impersonate the server. Note that this plugin does not attempt to recover an RSA ciphertext, however it sends a number of correct and malformed RSA ciphertexts as part of an SSL handshake and observes how the server responds. This plugin attempts to discover the vulnerability in multiple ways, by not completing the handshake and by completing it incorrectly, as well as using a variety of cipher suites. Only the first method that finds the service to be vulnerable is reported. This plugin requires report paranoia as some services will report as affected even though the issue is not exploitable.
last seen 2019-02-21
modified 2018-09-14
plugin id 105415
published 2017-12-26
reporter Tenable
title Return Of Bleichenbacher's Oracle Threat (ROBOT) Information Disclosure
refmap via4
bid 102170
cert-vn VU#144389
cisco 20171212 Bleichenbacher Attack on TLS Affecting Cisco Products: December 2017
sectrack 1039984
Last major update 05-03-2018 - 13:29
Published 05-03-2018 - 13:29
Last modified 29-03-2018 - 08:47
Back to Top