ubuntu-cve-2023-6937
Vulnerability from osv_ubuntu
Published
2024-02-15 18:15
Modified
2026-04-22 07:45
Summary
Details
wolfSSL prior to 5.6.6 did not check that messages in one (D)TLS record do not span key boundaries. As a result, it was possible to combine (D)TLS messages using different keys into one (D)TLS record. The most extreme edge case is that, in (D)TLS 1.3, it was possible that an unencrypted (D)TLS 1.3 record from the server containing first a ServerHello message and then the rest of the first server flight would be accepted by a wolfSSL client. In (D)TLS 1.3 the handshake is encrypted after the ServerHello but a wolfSSL client would accept an unencrypted flight from the server. This does not compromise key negotiation and authentication so it is assigned a low severity rating.
Severity
5.3 (Medium)
5.3 (Medium)
N/A (UNKNOWN)
References
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"binaries": [
{
"binary_name": "libcyassl5",
"binary_version": "3.4.8+dfsg-1"
},
{
"binary_name": "libwolfssl0",
"binary_version": "3.4.8+dfsg-1"
}
]
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Ubuntu:16.04:LTS",
"name": "wolfssl",
"purl": "pkg:deb/ubuntu/wolfssl@3.4.8+dfsg-1?arch=source\u0026distro=xenial"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
],
"versions": [
"3.4.8+dfsg-1"
]
},
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"binaries": [
{
"binary_name": "libwolfssl15",
"binary_version": "3.13.0+dfsg-1"
}
]
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Ubuntu:18.04:LTS",
"name": "wolfssl",
"purl": "pkg:deb/ubuntu/wolfssl@3.13.0+dfsg-1?arch=source\u0026distro=bionic"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
],
"versions": [
"3.10.2+dfsg-2",
"3.12.0+dfsg-1",
"3.12.2+dfsg-1",
"3.13.0+dfsg-1"
]
},
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"binaries": [
{
"binary_name": "libwolfssl24",
"binary_version": "4.3.0+dfsg-2"
}
]
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Ubuntu:20.04:LTS",
"name": "wolfssl",
"purl": "pkg:deb/ubuntu/wolfssl@4.3.0+dfsg-2?arch=source\u0026distro=focal"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
],
"versions": [
"4.1.0+dfsg-2",
"4.2.0+dfsg-1",
"4.2.0+dfsg-2",
"4.2.0+dfsg-3",
"4.3.0+dfsg-2"
]
},
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"binaries": [
{
"binary_name": "libwolfssl32",
"binary_version": "5.2.0-2"
}
]
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Ubuntu:22.04:LTS",
"name": "wolfssl",
"purl": "pkg:deb/ubuntu/wolfssl@5.2.0-2?arch=source\u0026distro=jammy"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
],
"versions": [
"4.6.0-3",
"5.0.0-1",
"5.1.1-1",
"5.2.0-1",
"5.2.0-2"
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"details": "wolfSSL prior to 5.6.6 did not check that messages in one (D)TLS record do not span key boundaries. As a result, it was possible to combine (D)TLS messages using different keys into one (D)TLS record. The most extreme edge case is that, in (D)TLS 1.3, it was possible that an unencrypted (D)TLS 1.3 record from the server containing first a ServerHello message and then the rest of the first server flight would be accepted by a wolfSSL client. In (D)TLS 1.3 the handshake is encrypted after the ServerHello but a wolfSSL client would accept an unencrypted flight from the server. This does not compromise key negotiation and authentication so it is assigned a low severity rating.",
"id": "UBUNTU-CVE-2023-6937",
"modified": "2026-04-22T07:45:11Z",
"published": "2024-02-15T18:15:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "REPORT",
"url": "https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2023-6937"
},
{
"type": "REPORT",
"url": "https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/blob/v5.6.6-stable/ChangeLog.md#vulnerabilities"
},
{
"type": "REPORT",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-6937"
}
],
"related": [],
"schema_version": "1.7.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "medium",
"type": "Ubuntu"
}
],
"upstream": [
"CVE-2023-6937"
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
Loading…
Loading…