Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

PyJWT is a Python implementation of RFC 7519. PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm. The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify `jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` to get support for all algorithms, or specify a single algorithm. The issue is not that big as `algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` has to be used. Users should upgrade to v2.4.0 to receive a patch for this issue. As a workaround, always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding.Show less

In (TBD) of (TBD), there is a possible way to decrypt local data encrypted by the GSC due to improperly used crypto. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android kernelAndroid ID: A-217475903References: N/AShow less

XWiki Platform is a generic wiki platform offering runtime services for applications built on top of it. The XWiki Crypto API will generate X509 certificates signed by default using SHA1 with RSA, which is not considered safe anymore for use in certificate signatures, due to the risk of collisions with SHA1. The problem has been patched in XWiki version 13.10.6, 14.3.1 and 14.4-rc-1. Since then, the Crypto API will generate X509 certificates signed by default using SHA256 with RSA. Administrators are advised to upgrade their XWiki installation to one of the patched versions. If the upgrade is not possible, it is possible to patch the module xwiki-platform-crypto in a local installation by applying the change exposed in 26728f3 and re-compiling the module.Show less

The OpenSSL 3.0 implementation of the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite incorrectly uses the AAD data as the MAC key. This makes the MAC key trivially predictable. An attacker could exploit this issue by performing a man-in-the-middle attack to modify data being sent from one endpoint to an OpenSSL 3.0 recipient such that the modified data would still pass the MAC integrity check. Note that data sent from an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint to a non-OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint will always be rejected by the recipient and the connection will fail at that point. Many application protocols require data to be sent from the client to the server first. Therefore, in such a case, only an OpenSSL 3.0 server would be impacted when talking to a non-OpenSSL 3.0 client. If both endpoints are OpenSSL 3.0 then the attacker could modify data being sent in both directions. In this case both clients and servers could be affected, regardless of the application protocol. Note that in the absence of an attacker this bug means that an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint communicating with a non-OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint will fail to complete the handshake when using this ciphersuite. The confidentiality of data is not impacted by this issue, i.e. an attacker cannot decrypt data that has been encrypted using this ciphersuite - they can only modify it. In order for this attack to work both endpoints must legitimately negotiate the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite. This ciphersuite is not compiled by default in OpenSSL 3.0, and is not available within the default provider or the default ciphersuite list. This ciphersuite will never be used if TLSv1.3 has been negotiated. In order for an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint to use this ciphersuite the following must have occurred: 1) OpenSSL must have been compiled with the (non-default) compile time option enable-weak-ssl-ciphers 2) OpenSSL must have had the legacy provider explicitly loaded (either through application code or via configuration) 3) The ciphersuite must have been explicitly added to the ciphersuite list 4) The libssl security level must have been set to 0 (default is 1) 5) A version of SSL/TLS below TLSv1.3 must have been negotiated 6) Both endpoints must negotiate the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite in preference to any others that both endpoints have in common Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2).Show less

A vulnerability in the automatic decryption process in Cisco Umbrella Secure Web Gateway (SWG) could allow an authenticated, adjacent attacker to bypass the SSL decryption and content filtering policies on an affected system. This vulnerability is due to how the decryption function uses the TLS Sever Name Indication (SNI) extension of an HTTP request to discover the destination domain and determine if the request needs to be decrypted. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted request over TLS from a client to an unknown or controlled URL. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to bypass the decryption process of Cisco Umbrella SWG and allow malicious content to be downloaded to a host on a protected network. There are workarounds that address this vulnerability.Show less

Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm in GitHub repository gnuboard/gnuboard5 prior to and including 5.5.5. A vulnerability in gnuboard v5.5.5 and below uses weak encryption algorithms leading to sensitive information exposure. This allows an attacker to derive the email address of any user, including when the 'Let others see my information.' box is ticked off. Or to send emails to any email address, with full control of its contentsShow less

A use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability [CWE-327] in the Dynamic Tunnel Protocol of FortiWAN before 4.5.9 may allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to decrypt and forge protocol communication messages.Show less

The use of the RSA algorithm without OAEP, or any other padding scheme, in telnetd_startup, allows an unauthenticated attacker on the local area network to achieve a significant degree of control over the "plaintext" to which an arbitrary blob of ciphertext will be decrypted by OpenSSL's RSA_public_decrypt() function. This weakness allows the attacker to manipulate the various iterations of the telnetd startup state machine and eventually obtain a root shell on the device, by means of an exchange of crafted UDP packets. In all versions but K2 22.5.9.163 and K3C 32.1.15.93 a successful attack also requires the exploitation of a null-byte interaction error (CVE-2022-25219).Show less

A risky-algorithm issue was discovered on Fujifilm DocuCentre-VI C4471 1.8 devices. An attacker that obtained access to the administrative web interface of a printer (e.g., by using the default credentials) can download the address book file, which contains the list of users (domain users, FTP users, etc.) stored on the printer, together with their encrypted passwords. The passwords are protected by a weak cipher, such as ROT13, which requires minimal effort to instantly retrieve the original password, giving the attacker a list of valid domain or FTP usernames and passwords.Show less

Users of the LearnPress WordPress plugin before 4.1.5 can upload an image as a profile avatar after the registration. After this process the user crops and saves the image. Then a "POST" request that contains user supplied name of the image is sent to the server for renaming and cropping of the image. As a result of this request, the name of the user-supplied image is changed with a MD5 value. This process can be conducted only when type of the image is JPG or PNG. An attacker can use this vulnerability in order to rename an arbitrary image file. By doing this, they could destroy the design of the web site.Show less