Improper Certificate Validation

"Vault and Vault Enterprise 1.8.0 through 1.8.8, and 1.9.3 allowed the PKI secrets engine under certain configurations to issue wildcard certificates to authorized users for a specified domain, even if the PKI role policy attribute allow_subdomains is set to false. Fixed in Vault Enterprise 1.8.9 and 1.9.4.Show less

Improper check for certificate revocation in i-FILTER Ver.10.45R01 and earlier, i-FILTER Ver.9.50R10 and earlier, i-FILTER Browser & Cloud MultiAgent for Windows Ver.4.93R04 and earlier, and D-SPA (Ver.3 / Ver.4) using i-FILTER allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to conduct a man-in-the-middle attack and eavesdrop on an encrypted communication.Show less

A flaw was found in Cockpit in versions prior to 260 in the way it handles the certificate verification performed by the System Security Services Daemon (SSSD). This flaw allows client certificates to authenticate successfully, regardless of the Certificate Revocation List (CRL) configuration or the certificate status. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to confidentiality.Show less

A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM i800, RUGGEDCOM i801, RUGGEDCOM i802, RUGGEDCOM i803, RUGGEDCOM M2100, RUGGEDCOM M2100F, RUGGEDCOM M2200, RUGGEDCOM M2200F, RUGGEDCOM M969, RUGGEDCOM M969F, RUGGEDCOM RMC30, RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RP110, RUGGEDCOM RS1600, RUGGEDCOM RS1600F, RUGGEDCOM RS1600T, RUGGEDCOM RS400, RUGGEDCOM RS400F, RUGGEDCOM RS401, RUGGEDCOM RS416, RUGGEDCOM RS416F, RUGGEDCOM RS416P, RUGGEDCOM RS416PF, RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS8000, RUGGEDCOM RS8000A, RUGGEDCOM RS8000H, RUGGEDCOM RS8000T, RUGGEDCOM RS900, RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900F, RUGGEDCOM RS900G, RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900GF, RUGGEDCOM RS900GP, RUGGEDCOM RS900GPF, RUGGEDCOM RS900L, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-C01, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-XX, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-C01, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-XX, RUGGEDCOM RS900W, RUGGEDCOM RS910, RUGGEDCOM RS910L, RUGGEDCOM RS910W, RUGGEDCOM RS920L, RUGGEDCOM RS920W, RUGGEDCOM RS930L, RUGGEDCOM RS930W, RUGGEDCOM RS940G, RUGGEDCOM RS940GF, RUGGEDCOM RS969, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100F, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100PF, RUGGEDCOM RSG2200, RUGGEDCOM RSG2200F, RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300F, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300P V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300PF, RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2488 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2488F, RUGGEDCOM RSG907R, RUGGEDCOM RSG908C, RUGGEDCOM RSG909R, RUGGEDCOM RSG910C, RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG920P V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSL910, RUGGEDCOM RST2228, RUGGEDCOM RST2228P, RUGGEDCOM RST916C, RUGGEDCOM RST916P. A new variant of the POODLE attack has left a third-party component vulnerable due to the implementation flaws of the CBC encryption mode in TLS 1.0 to 1.2. If an attacker were to exploit this, they could act as a man-in-the-middle and eavesdrop on encrypted communications.Show less

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 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 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 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, 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, 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 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 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 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 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 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

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 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

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. 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 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