Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

In OSIsoft PI System multiple products and versions, a local attacker can plant a binary and bypass a code integrity check for loading PI System libraries. This exploitation can target another local user of PI System software on the computer to escalate privilege and result in unauthorized information disclosure, deletion, or modification.Show less

Sylabs Singularity 3.0 through 3.5 has Improper Validation of an Integrity Check Value. Image integrity is not validated when an ECL policy is enforced. The fingerprint required by the ECL is compared against the signature object descriptor(s) in the SIF file, rather than to a cryptographically validated signature.Show less

The tough library (Rust/crates.io) prior to version 0.7.1 does not properly verify the threshold of cryptographic signatures. It allows an attacker to duplicate a valid signature in order to circumvent TUF requiring a minimum threshold of unique signatures before the metadata is considered valid. A fix is available in version 0.7.1. CVE-2020-6174 is assigned to the same vulnerability in the TUF reference implementation.Show less

HUAWEI P30 with versions earlier than 10.1.0.135(C00E135R2P11) have an improper signature verification vulnerability. The system does not improper check signature of specific software package, an attacker may exploit this vulnerability to load a crafted software package to the device.Show less

TenderMint from version 0.33.0 and before version 0.33.6 allows block proposers to include signatures for the wrong block. This may happen naturally if you start a network, have it run for some time and restart it (**without changing chainID**). A malicious block proposer (even with a minimal amount of stake) can use this vulnerability to completely halt the network. This issue is fixed in Tendermint 0.33.6 which checks all the signatures are for the block with 2/3+ majority before creating a commit.Show less

When Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) authentication is enabled and the 'Validate Identity Provider Certificate' option is disabled (unchecked), improper verification of signatures in PAN-OS SAML authentication enables an unauthenticated network-based attacker to access protected resources. The attacker must have network access to the vulnerable server to exploit this vulnerability. This issue affects PAN-OS 9.1 versions earlier than PAN-OS 9.1.3; PAN-OS 9.0 versions earlier than PAN-OS 9.0.9; PAN-OS 8.1 versions earlier than PAN-OS 8.1.15, and all versions of PAN-OS 8.0 (EOL). This issue does not affect PAN-OS 7.1. This issue cannot be exploited if SAML is not used for authentication. This issue cannot be exploited if the 'Validate Identity Provider Certificate' option is enabled (checked) in the SAML Identity Provider Server Profile. Resources that can be protected by SAML-based single sign-on (SSO) authentication are: GlobalProtect Gateway, GlobalProtect Portal, GlobalProtect Clientless VPN, Authentication and Captive Portal, PAN-OS next-generation firewalls (PA-Series, VM-Series) and Panorama web interfaces, Prisma Access In the case of GlobalProtect Gateways, GlobalProtect Portal, Clientless VPN, Captive Portal, and Prisma Access, an unauthenticated attacker with network access to the affected servers can gain access to protected resources if allowed by configured authentication and Security policies. There is no impact on the integrity and availability of the gateway, portal or VPN server. An attacker cannot inspect or tamper with sessions of regular users. In the worst case, this is a critical severity vulnerability with a CVSS Base Score of 10.0 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N). In the case of PAN-OS and Panorama web interfaces, this issue allows an unauthenticated attacker with network access to the PAN-OS or Panorama web interfaces to log in as an administrator and perform administrative actions. In the worst-case scenario, this is a critical severity vulnerability with a CVSS Base Score of 10.0 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H). If the web interfaces are only accessible to a restricted management network, then the issue is lowered to a CVSS Base Score of 9.6 (CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H). Palo Alto Networks is not aware of any malicious attempts to exploit this vulnerability.Show less

A vulnerability exists that could allow the execution of unauthorized code or operating system commands on systems running exacqVision Web Service versions 20.06.3.0 and prior and exacqVision Enterprise Manager versions 20.06.4.0 and prior. An attacker with administrative privileges could potentially download and run a malicious executable that could allow OS command injection on the system.Show less

In Argent RecoveryManager before 0xdc350d09f71c48c5D22fBE2741e4d6A03970E192, the executeRecovery function does not require any signatures in the zero-guardian case, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service (locking) or a takeover.Show less

An issue was discovered in the jsrsasign package through 8.0.18 for Node.js. It allows a malleability in ECDSA signatures by not checking overflows in the length of a sequence and '0' characters appended or prepended to an integer. The modified signatures are verified as valid. This could have a security-relevant impact if an application relied on a single canonical signature.Show less

BIP-143 in the Bitcoin protocol specification mishandles the signing of a Segwit transaction, which allows attackers to trick a user into making two signatures in certain cases, potentially leading to a huge transaction fee. NOTE: this affects all hardware wallets. It was fixed in 1.9.1 for the Trezor One and 2.3.1 for the Trezor Model T.Show less

Crypt::Perl::ECDSA in the Crypt::Perl (aka p5-Crypt-Perl) module before 0.32 for Perl fails to verify correct ECDSA signatures when r and s are small and when s = 1. This happens when using the curve secp256r1 (prime256v1). This could conceivably have a security-relevant impact if an attacker wishes to use public r and s values when guessing whether signature verification will fail.Show less

A vulnerability in software image verification in Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an unauthenticated, physical attacker to install and boot a malicious software image or execute unsigned binaries on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to an improper check on the area of code that manages the verification of the digital signatures of system image files during the initial boot process. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by loading unsigned software on an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to install and boot a malicious software image or execute unsigned binaries on the targeted device.Show less

An issue was discovered in fastecdsa before 2.1.2. When using the NIST P-256 curve in the ECDSA implementation, the point at infinity is mishandled. This means that for an extreme value in k and s^-1, the signature verification fails even if the signature is correct. This behavior is not solely a usability problem. There are some threat models where an attacker can benefit by successfully guessing users for whom signature verification will fail.Show less

An issue was discovered in Aviatrix Controller through 5.1. An attacker with any signed SAML assertion from the Identity Provider can establish a connection (even if that SAML assertion has expired or is from a user who is not authorized to access Aviatrix), aka XML Signature Wrapping.Show less