ghsa-fwxf-w2h7-9w25
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-13 01:45
Modified
2022-05-13 01:45
Severity ?
5.9 (Medium) - CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Details

OpenSSL 1.0.2 (starting from version 1.0.2b) introduced an "error state" mechanism. The intent was that if a fatal error occurred during a handshake then OpenSSL would move into the error state and would immediately fail if you attempted to continue the handshake. This works as designed for the explicit handshake functions (SSL_do_handshake(), SSL_accept() and SSL_connect()), however due to a bug it does not work correctly if SSL_read() or SSL_write() is called directly. In that scenario, if the handshake fails then a fatal error will be returned in the initial function call. If SSL_read()/SSL_write() is subsequently called by the application for the same SSL object then it will succeed and the data is passed without being decrypted/encrypted directly from the SSL/TLS record layer. In order to exploit this issue an application bug would have to be present that resulted in a call to SSL_read()/SSL_write() being issued after having already received a fatal error. OpenSSL version 1.0.2b-1.0.2m are affected. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2n. OpenSSL 1.1.0 is not affected.

Show details on source website

To clipboard 

{
   affected: [],
   aliases: [
      "CVE-2017-3737",
   ],
   database_specific: {
      cwe_ids: [
         "CWE-125",
      ],
      github_reviewed: false,
      github_reviewed_at: null,
      nvd_published_at: "2017-12-07T16:29:00Z",
      severity: "MODERATE",
   },
   details: "OpenSSL 1.0.2 (starting from version 1.0.2b) introduced an \"error state\" mechanism. The intent was that if a fatal error occurred during a handshake then OpenSSL would move into the error state and would immediately fail if you attempted to continue the handshake. This works as designed for the explicit handshake functions (SSL_do_handshake(), SSL_accept() and SSL_connect()), however due to a bug it does not work correctly if SSL_read() or SSL_write() is called directly. In that scenario, if the handshake fails then a fatal error will be returned in the initial function call. If SSL_read()/SSL_write() is subsequently called by the application for the same SSL object then it will succeed and the data is passed without being decrypted/encrypted directly from the SSL/TLS record layer. In order to exploit this issue an application bug would have to be present that resulted in a call to SSL_read()/SSL_write() being issued after having already received a fatal error. OpenSSL version 1.0.2b-1.0.2m are affected. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2n. OpenSSL 1.1.0 is not affected.",
   id: "GHSA-fwxf-w2h7-9w25",
   modified: "2022-05-13T01:45:50Z",
   published: "2022-05-13T01:45:50Z",
   references: [
      {
         type: "ADVISORY",
         url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-3737",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/898fb884b706aaeb283de4812340bb0bde8476dc",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.tenable.com/security/tns-2017-16",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2019-5072835.html",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20171207.txt",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.digitalmunition.me/2017/12/cve-2017-3737-openssl-security-bypass-vulnerability",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-4065",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20180419-0002",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20180117-0002",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20171208-0001",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/201712-03",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://security.FreeBSD.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-17:12.openssl.asc",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-179516.pdf",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2187",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2186",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2185",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0998",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/102103",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039978",
      },
   ],
   schema_version: "1.4.0",
   severity: [
      {
         score: "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
         type: "CVSS_V3",
      },
   ],
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.

Security Advisory comment format.

This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.

UUIDv4 of the comment
UUIDv4 of the Vulnerability-Lookup instance
When the comment was created originally
When the comment was last updated
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
The identifier of the vulnerability (CVE ID, GHSA-ID, PYSEC ID, etc.).



Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.