In spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ , applications that are configured to enable HTTP2 and no key store or trusted certificates are set will be configured to use an insecure TrustManager. This makes the gate...Show moreIn spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ , applications that are configured to enable HTTP2 and no key store or trusted certificates are set will be configured to use an insecure TrustManager. This makes the gateway able to connect to remote services with invalid or custom certificates.Show less |
Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name th...Show moreNode.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name that would be interpreted as a multi-value Relative Distinguished Name, for example, in order to inject a Common Name that would allow bypassing the certificate subject verification.Affected versions of Node.js that do not accept multi-value Relative Distinguished Names and are thus not vulnerable to such attacks themselves. However, third-party code that uses node's ambiguous presentation of certificate subjects may be vulnerable.Show less |
Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 converts SANs (Subject Alternative Names) to a string format. It uses this string to check peer certificates against hostnames when validating connections. The string...Show moreNode.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 converts SANs (Subject Alternative Names) to a string format. It uses this string to check peer certificates against hostnames when validating connections. The string format was subject to an injection vulnerability when name constraints were used within a certificate chain, allowing the bypass of these name constraints.Versions of Node.js with the fix for this escape SANs containing the problematic characters in order to prevent the injection. This behavior can be reverted through the --security-revert command-line option.Show less |
Accepting arbitrary Subject Alternative Name (SAN) types, unless a PKI is specifically defined to use a particular SAN type, can result in bypassing name-constrained intermediates. Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2...Show moreAccepting arbitrary Subject Alternative Name (SAN) types, unless a PKI is specifically defined to use a particular SAN type, can result in bypassing name-constrained intermediates. Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 was accepting URI SAN types, which PKIs are often not defined to use. Additionally, when a protocol allows URI SANs, Node.js did not match the URI correctly.Versions of Node.js with the fix for this disable the URI SAN type when checking a certificate against a hostname. This behavior can be reverted through the --security-revert command-line option.Show less |
In wolfSSL before 5.2.0, a TLS 1.3 server cannot properly enforce a requirement for mutual authentication. A client can simply omit the certificate_verify message from the handshake, and never present a certificate. |
In wolfSSL before 5.2.0, certificate validation may be bypassed during attempted authentication by a TLS 1.3 client to a TLS 1.3 server. This occurs when the sig_algo field differs between the certificate_verify message...Show moreIn wolfSSL before 5.2.0, certificate validation may be bypassed during attempted authentication by a TLS 1.3 client to a TLS 1.3 server. This occurs when the sig_algo field differs between the certificate_verify message and the certificate message.Show less |
LibreOffice supports digital signatures of ODF documents and macros within documents, presenting visual aids that no alteration of the document occurred since the last signing and that the signature is valid. An Improper...Show moreLibreOffice supports digital signatures of ODF documents and macros within documents, presenting visual aids that no alteration of the document occurred since the last signing and that the signature is valid. An Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in LibreOffice allowed an attacker to create a digitally signed ODF document, by manipulating the documentsignatures.xml or macrosignatures.xml stream within the document to contain both "X509Data" and "KeyValue" children of the "KeyInfo" tag, which when opened caused LibreOffice to verify using the "KeyValue" but to report verification with the unrelated "X509Data" value. This issue affects: The Document Foundation LibreOffice 7.2 versions prior to 7.2.5.Show less |
Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. In affected versions Envoy does not restrict the set of certificates it accepts from the peer, either as a TLS client or a TLS serve...Show moreEnvoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. In affected versions Envoy does not restrict the set of certificates it accepts from the peer, either as a TLS client or a TLS server, to only those certificates that contain the necessary extendedKeyUsage (id-kp-serverAuth and id-kp-clientAuth, respectively). This means that a peer may present an e-mail certificate (e.g. id-kp-emailProtection), either as a leaf certificate or as a CA in the chain, and it will be accepted for TLS. This is particularly bad when combined with the issue described in pull request #630, in that it allows a Web PKI CA that is intended only for use with S/MIME, and thus exempted from audit or supervision, to issue TLS certificates that will be accepted by Envoy. As a result Envoy will trust upstream certificates that should not be trusted. There are no known workarounds to this issue. Users are advised to upgrade.Show less |
Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. The default_validator.cc implementation used to implement the default certificate validation routines has a "type confusion" bug whe...Show moreEnvoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. The default_validator.cc implementation used to implement the default certificate validation routines has a "type confusion" bug when processing subjectAltNames. This processing allows, for example, an rfc822Name or uniformResourceIndicator to be authenticated as a domain name. This confusion allows for the bypassing of nameConstraints, as processed by the underlying OpenSSL/BoringSSL implementation, exposing the possibility of impersonation of arbitrary servers. As a result Envoy will trust upstream certificates that should not be trusted.Show less |
Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. Envoy's tls allows re-use when some cert validation settings have changed from their default configuration. The only workaround for...Show moreEnvoy is an open source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications. Envoy's tls allows re-use when some cert validation settings have changed from their default configuration. The only workaround for this issue is to ensure that default tls settings are used. Users are advised to upgrade.Show less |
Cosign provides container signing, verification, and storage in an OCI registry for the sigstore project. Prior to version 1.5.2, Cosign can be manipulated to claim that an entry for a signature exists in the Rekor trans...Show moreCosign provides container signing, verification, and storage in an OCI registry for the sigstore project. Prior to version 1.5.2, Cosign can be manipulated to claim that an entry for a signature exists in the Rekor transparency log even if it doesn't. This requires the attacker to have pull and push permissions for the signature in OCI. This can happen with both standard signing with a keypair and "keyless signing" with Fulcio. If an attacker has access to the signature in OCI, they can manipulate cosign into believing the entry was stored in Rekor even though it wasn't. The vulnerability has been patched in v1.5.2 of Cosign. The `signature` in the `signedEntryTimestamp` provided by Rekor is now compared to the `signature` that is being verified. If these don't match, then an error is returned. If a valid bundle is copied to a different signature, verification should fail. Cosign output now only informs the user that certificates were verified if a certificate was in fact verified. There is currently no known workaround.Show less |
Pexip Infinity Connect before 1.8.0 mishandles TLS certificate validation. The allow list is not properly checked. |
Traefik is an HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer. Prior to version 2.6.1, Traefik skips the router transport layer security (TLS) configuration when the host header is a fully qualified domain name (FQDN). For a reques...Show moreTraefik is an HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer. Prior to version 2.6.1, Traefik skips the router transport layer security (TLS) configuration when the host header is a fully qualified domain name (FQDN). For a request, the TLS configuration choice can be different than the router choice, which implies the use of a wrong TLS configuration. When sending a request using FQDN handled by a router configured with a dedicated TLS configuration, the TLS configuration falls back to the default configuration that might not correspond to the configured one. If the CNAME flattening is enabled, the selected TLS configuration is the SNI one and the routing uses the CNAME value, so this can skip the expected TLS configuration. Version 2.6.1 contains a patch for this issue. As a workaround, one may add the FDQN to the host rule. However, there is no workaround if the CNAME flattening is enabled.Show less |
Hutool v5.7.18's HttpRequest was discovered to ignore all TLS/SSL certificate validation. |
In Mellium mellium.im/xmpp through 0.21.0, an attacker capable of spoofing DNS TXT records can redirect a WebSocket connection request to a server under their control without causing TLS certificate verification to fail....Show moreIn Mellium mellium.im/xmpp through 0.21.0, an attacker capable of spoofing DNS TXT records can redirect a WebSocket connection request to a server under their control without causing TLS certificate verification to fail. This occurs because the wrong host name is selected during this verification.Show less |
Multiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Small Business RV160, RV260, RV340, and RV345 Series Routers could allow an attacker to do any of the following: Execute arbitrary code Elevate privileges Execute arbitrary commands Bypa...Show moreMultiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Small Business RV160, RV260, RV340, and RV345 Series Routers could allow an attacker to do any of the following: Execute arbitrary code Elevate privileges Execute arbitrary commands Bypass authentication and authorization protections Fetch and run unsigned software Cause denial of service (DoS) For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.Show less |
A CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability exists that could allow a Man-in-theMiddle attack when communications between the client and Geo SCADA database server are intercepted. Affected Product: ClearSCAD...Show moreA CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability exists that could allow a Man-in-theMiddle attack when communications between the client and Geo SCADA database server are intercepted. Affected Product: ClearSCADA (All Versions), EcoStruxure Geo SCADA Expert 2019 (All Versions), EcoStruxure Geo SCADA Expert 2020 (All Versions)Show less |
A CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability exists that could allow a Man-in-theMiddle attack when communications between the client and Geo SCADA web server are intercepted. Affected Product: ClearSCADA (Al...Show moreA CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability exists that could allow a Man-in-theMiddle attack when communications between the client and Geo SCADA web server are intercepted. Affected Product: ClearSCADA (All Versions), EcoStruxure Geo SCADA Expert 2019 (All Versions), EcoStruxure Geo SCADA Expert 2020 (All Versions)Show less |
In Preloader XFLASH, there is a possible escalation of privilege due to an improper certificate validation. This could lead to local escalation of privilege for an attacker who has physical access to the device with no a...Show moreIn Preloader XFLASH, there is a possible escalation of privilege due to an improper certificate validation. This could lead to local escalation of privilege for an attacker who has physical access to the device with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS06160806; Issue ID: ALPS06160806.Show less |
A misconfiguration exists in the MQTTS functionality of Sealevel Systems, Inc. SeaConnect 370W v1.3.34. This misconfiguration significantly simplifies a man-in-the-middle attack, which directly leads to control of device...Show moreA misconfiguration exists in the MQTTS functionality of Sealevel Systems, Inc. SeaConnect 370W v1.3.34. This misconfiguration significantly simplifies a man-in-the-middle attack, which directly leads to control of device functionality.Show less |