ghsa-hvc4-mjv4-5mw6
Vulnerability from github
Published
2024-04-25 09:32
Modified
2024-11-01 18:31
Details

Issue summary: Checking excessively long invalid RSA public keys may take a long time.

Impact summary: Applications that use the function EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check RSA public keys may experience long delays. Where the key that is being checked has been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service.

When function EVP_PKEY_public_check() is called on RSA public keys, a computation is done to confirm that the RSA modulus, n, is composite. For valid RSA keys, n is a product of two or more large primes and this computation completes quickly. However, if n is an overly large prime, then this computation would take a long time.

An application that calls EVP_PKEY_public_check() and supplies an RSA key obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack.

The function EVP_PKEY_public_check() is not called from other OpenSSL functions however it is called from the OpenSSL pkey command line application. For that reason that application is also vulnerable if used with the '-pubin' and '-check' options on untrusted data.

The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue.

The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are affected by this issue.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-6237"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-606"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-04-25T07:15:45Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Issue summary: Checking excessively long invalid RSA public keys may take\na long time.\n\nImpact summary: Applications that use the function EVP_PKEY_public_check()\nto check RSA public keys may experience long delays. Where the key that\nis being checked has been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead\nto a Denial of Service.\n\nWhen function EVP_PKEY_public_check() is called on RSA public keys,\na computation is done to confirm that the RSA modulus, n, is composite.\nFor valid RSA keys, n is a product of two or more large primes and this\ncomputation completes quickly. However, if n is an overly large prime,\nthen this computation would take a long time.\n\nAn application that calls EVP_PKEY_public_check() and supplies an RSA key\nobtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service\nattack.\n\nThe function EVP_PKEY_public_check() is not called from other OpenSSL\nfunctions however it is called from the OpenSSL pkey command line\napplication. For that reason that application is also vulnerable if used\nwith the \u0027-pubin\u0027 and \u0027-check\u0027 options on untrusted data.\n\nThe OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue.\n\nThe OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are affected by this issue.",
  "id": "GHSA-hvc4-mjv4-5mw6",
  "modified": "2024-11-01T18:31:25Z",
  "published": "2024-04-25T09:32:09Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-6237"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/0b0f7abfb37350794a4b8960fafc292cd5d1b84d"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/18c02492138d1eb8b6548cb26e7b625fb2414a2a"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a830f551557d3d66a84bbb18a5b889c640c36294"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240531-0007"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20240115.txt"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/11/1"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.