pysec-2018-97
Vulnerability from pysec
Published
2018-02-03 15:29
Modified
2021-08-27 03:22
Details
lib/Crypto/PublicKey/ElGamal.py in PyCrypto through 2.6.1 generates weak ElGamal key parameters, which allows attackers to obtain sensitive information by reading ciphertext data (i.e., it does not have semantic security in face of a ciphertext-only attack). The Decisional Diffie-Hellman (DDH) assumption does not hold for PyCrypto's ElGamal implementation.
Impacted products
Name | purl | pycrypto | pkg:pypi/pycrypto |
---|
Aliases
{ "affected": [ { "package": { "ecosystem": "PyPI", "name": "pycrypto", "purl": "pkg:pypi/pycrypto" }, "ranges": [ { "events": [ { "introduced": "0" } ], "type": "ECOSYSTEM" } ], "versions": [ "1.9a2", "1.9a5", "1.9a6", "2.0", "2.0.1", "2.1.0", "2.2", "2.3", "2.4", "2.4.1", "2.5", "2.6", "2.6.1" ] } ], "aliases": [ "CVE-2018-6594", "GHSA-6528-wvf6-f6qg" ], "details": "lib/Crypto/PublicKey/ElGamal.py in PyCrypto through 2.6.1 generates weak ElGamal key parameters, which allows attackers to obtain sensitive information by reading ciphertext data (i.e., it does not have semantic security in face of a ciphertext-only attack). The Decisional Diffie-Hellman (DDH) assumption does not hold for PyCrypto\u0027s ElGamal implementation.", "id": "PYSEC-2018-97", "modified": "2021-08-27T03:22:16.704345Z", "published": "2018-02-03T15:29:00Z", "references": [ { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://github.com/TElgamal/attack-on-pycrypto-elgamal" }, { "type": "REPORT", "url": "https://github.com/dlitz/pycrypto/issues/253" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/02/msg00018.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/3616-1/" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/3616-2/" }, { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202007-62" }, { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-6528-wvf6-f6qg" } ] }
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.
Loading…