CWE-327
Allowed-with-ReviewUse of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
960 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-G339-4H86-HR72
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:16 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:16Dell EMC InsightIQ, versions prior to 4.1.4, contain risky cryptographic algorithms in the SSH component. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability leading to authentication bypass and remote takeover of the InsightIQ. This allows an attacker to take complete control of InsightIQ to affect services provided by SSH; so Dell recommends customers to upgrade at the earliest opportunity.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-36298"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-10-01T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Dell EMC InsightIQ, versions prior to 4.1.4, contain risky cryptographic algorithms in the SSH component. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability leading to authentication bypass and remote takeover of the InsightIQ. This allows an attacker to take complete control of InsightIQ to affect services provided by SSH; so Dell recommends customers to upgrade at the earliest opportunity.",
"id": "GHSA-g339-4h86-hr72",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:16:15Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:16:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-36298"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/000191604"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-G4XW-PV27-8M29
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-04 15:30 – Updated: 2026-07-04 15:30A vulnerability has been found in ForceInjection AI-fundermentals 2.0/3.0. Affected by this vulnerability is the function get_conversation_history of the file 08_agentic_system/memory/langchain/code/smart_customer_service.py of the component Memory Recall Handler. The manipulation leads to use of weak hash. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of the patch is f57277fdd9ba373ace72d83c272023ec67f720d6. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue. The project confirms (translated from Chinese): "We now require session ownership verification in methods such as username, sessionowner, etc., and we've chat()changed the generation of sessionowner to include verified user identity and security context metadata."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14630"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-04T15:16:30Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been found in ForceInjection AI-fundermentals 2.0/3.0. Affected by this vulnerability is the function get_conversation_history of the file 08_agentic_system/memory/langchain/code/smart_customer_service.py of the component Memory Recall Handler. The manipulation leads to use of weak hash. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of the patch is f57277fdd9ba373ace72d83c272023ec67f720d6. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue. The project confirms (translated from Chinese): \"We now require session ownership verification in methods such as `username`, `sessionowner`, etc., and we\u0027ve chat()changed the generation of `sessionowner` to include verified user identity and security context metadata.\"",
"id": "GHSA-g4xw-pv27-8m29",
"modified": "2026-07-04T15:30:23Z",
"published": "2026-07-04T15:30:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14630"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ForceInjection/AI-fundamentals/issues/17"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ForceInjection/AI-fundamentals/pull/18"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ForceInjection/AI-fundamentals/commit/f57277fdd9ba373ace72d83c272023ec67f720d6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-14630"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/845672"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/376146"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/376146/cti"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-G583-4MG8-HQ84
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-12-20 21:30 – Updated: 2022-12-20 21:30In decrypt_1_2 of CryptoPlugin.cpp, there is a possible out of bounds read due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-13Android ID: A-244569759
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-20513"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-125",
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-12-16T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In decrypt_1_2 of CryptoPlugin.cpp, there is a possible out of bounds read due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-13Android ID: A-244569759",
"id": "GHSA-g583-4mg8-hq84",
"modified": "2022-12-20T21:30:19Z",
"published": "2022-12-20T21:30:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-20513"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/pixel/2022-12-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G5CM-FP5C-4JFP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-04 15:30 – Updated: 2025-01-04 15:30IBM Engineering Lifecycle Optimization - Publishing 7.0.2 and 7.0.3 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-41763"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-04T15:15:06Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "IBM Engineering Lifecycle Optimization - Publishing 7.0.2 and 7.0.3 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information.",
"id": "GHSA-g5cm-fp5c-4jfp",
"modified": "2025-01-04T15:30:45Z",
"published": "2025-01-04T15:30:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-41763"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7180204"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G5HG-3X62-V52F
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-03-07 00:30 – Updated: 2023-03-13 18:30Since the Windows Kerberos RC4-HMAC Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability was disclosed by Microsoft on Nov 8 2022 and per RFC8429 it is assumed that rc4-hmac is weak, Vulnerable Samba Active Directory DCs will issue rc4-hmac encrypted tickets despite the target server supporting better encryption (eg aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-45141"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-326",
"CWE-327",
"CWE-328"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-03-06T23:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Since the Windows Kerberos RC4-HMAC Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability was disclosed by Microsoft on Nov 8 2022 and per RFC8429 it is assumed that rc4-hmac is weak, Vulnerable Samba Active Directory DCs will issue rc4-hmac encrypted tickets despite the target server supporting better encryption (eg aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96).",
"id": "GHSA-g5hg-3x62-v52f",
"modified": "2023-03-13T18:30:41Z",
"published": "2023-03-07T00:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-45141"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202309-06"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2022-45141.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G5VF-V6WF-7W2R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2020-10-16 00:51 – Updated: 2025-06-05 16:44Impact
Tink's Java version before 1.5 under some circumstances allowed attackers to change the key ID part of the ciphertext, resulting in the attacker creating a second ciphertext that will decrypt to the same plaintext. This can be a problem in particular in the case of encrypting with a deterministic AEAD with a single key, and relying on the fact that there is only a single valid ciphertext per plaintext.
No loss of confidentiality or loss of plaintext integrity occurs due to this problem, only ciphertext integrity is compromised.
Patches
The issue was fixed in this pull request.
Workarounds
The only workaround is to backport the fixing pull request.
Details
Tink uses the first five bytes of a ciphertext for a version byte and a four byte key ID. Since each key has a well defined prefix, this extends non-malleability properties (but technically not indistinguishability). However, in the Java version this prefix lookup used a hash map indexed by unicode strings instead of the byte array, which means that invalid Unicode characters would be replaced by U+FFFD by the Java API's default behavior. This means several different values for the five bytes would result in the same hash table key, which allows an attacker to exchange one invalid byte sequence for another, creating a mutated ciphertext that still decrypts (to the same plaintext).
Acknowledgements
We'd like to thank Peter Esbensen for finding this issue and raising it internally.
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in Tink
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.google.crypto.tink:tink"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.5.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-8929"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-176",
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-10-16T00:49:43Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2020-10-19T13:15:13Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\nTink\u0027s Java version before 1.5 under some circumstances allowed attackers to change the key ID part of the ciphertext, resulting in the attacker creating a second ciphertext that will decrypt to the same plaintext. This can be a problem in particular in the case of encrypting with a deterministic AEAD with a single key, and relying on the fact that there is only a single valid ciphertext per plaintext.\n\nNo loss of confidentiality or loss of plaintext integrity occurs due to this problem, only ciphertext integrity is compromised.\n\n### Patches\nThe issue was fixed in this [pull request](https://github.com/google/tink/commit/93d839a5865b9d950dffdc9d0bc99b71280a8899).\n\n### Workarounds\nThe only workaround is to backport the fixing [pull request](https://github.com/google/tink/commit/93d839a5865b9d950dffdc9d0bc99b71280a8899).\n\n### Details\nTink uses the first five bytes of a ciphertext for a version byte and a four byte key ID. Since each key has a well defined prefix, this extends non-malleability properties (but technically not indistinguishability). However, in the Java version this prefix lookup used a hash map indexed by unicode strings instead of the byte array, which means that invalid Unicode characters would be [replaced by U+FFFD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-8#Invalid_sequences_and_error_handling) by the [Java API\u0027s default behavior](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/String.html#String(byte[],%20java.nio.charset.Charset)). This means several different values for the five bytes would result in the same hash table key, which allows an attacker to exchange one invalid byte sequence for another, creating a mutated ciphertext that still decrypts (to the same plaintext).\n\n### Acknowledgements\nWe\u0027d like to thank Peter Esbensen for finding this issue and raising it internally.\n\n### For more information\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Open an issue in [Tink](https://github.com/google/tink/issues)",
"id": "GHSA-g5vf-v6wf-7w2r",
"modified": "2025-06-05T16:44:52Z",
"published": "2020-10-16T00:51:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/google/tink/security/advisories/GHSA-g5vf-v6wf-7w2r"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-8929"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/google/tink/commit/93d839a5865b9d950dffdc9d0bc99b71280a8899"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/tink/PYSEC-2020-142.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Ciphertext Malleability Issue in Tink Java"
}
GHSA-G5X8-4P3X-GCFV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:06 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:06IBM Guardium Data Encryption (GDE) 3.0.0.3 and 4.0.0.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 195711.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-20379"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-07-07T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "IBM Guardium Data Encryption (GDE) 3.0.0.3 and 4.0.0.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 195711.",
"id": "GHSA-g5x8-4p3x-gcfv",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:06:59Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:06:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-20379"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/195711"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6469407"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-G6M4-PC36-MCHV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:50 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:50An issue was discovered in Valve Steam Link build 643. Root passwords longer than 8 characters are truncated because of the default use of DES (aka the CONFIG_FEATURE_DEFAULT_PASSWD_ALGO="des" setting).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-17878"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-12-27T17:08:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in Valve Steam Link build 643. Root passwords longer than 8 characters are truncated because of the default use of DES (aka the CONFIG_FEATURE_DEFAULT_PASSWD_ALGO=\"des\" setting).",
"id": "GHSA-g6m4-pc36-mchv",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:50:50Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:50:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-17878"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steamlink-sdk/issues/101"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steamlink-sdk/issues/110"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blogger.davidmanouchehri.com/2017/12/steam-link-security-truncated-password.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G7JH-888P-999R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-11-01 12:00 – Updated: 2022-11-02 19:00The provided HCL Launch Container images contain non-unique HTTPS certificates and a database encryption key. The fix provides directions and tools to replace the non-unique keys and certificates. This does not affect the standard installer packages.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-27784"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-10-31T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The provided HCL Launch Container images contain non-unique HTTPS certificates and a database encryption key. The fix provides directions and tools to replace the non-unique keys and certificates. This does not affect the standard installer packages.",
"id": "GHSA-g7jh-888p-999r",
"modified": "2022-11-02T19:00:32Z",
"published": "2022-11-01T12:00:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-27784"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.hcltechsw.com/csm?id=kb_article\u0026sysparm_article=KB0101093"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G8X8-9HP6-3PPJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:08 – Updated: 2022-07-13 00:01iDrive RemotePC before 7.6.48 on Windows allows information disclosure. A locally authenticated attacker can read an encrypted version of the system's Personal Key in world-readable %PROGRAMDATA% log files. The encryption is done using a hard-coded static key and is therefore reversible by an attacker.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-34688"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-07-15T14:15:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "iDrive RemotePC before 7.6.48 on Windows allows information disclosure. A locally authenticated attacker can read an encrypted version of the system\u0027s Personal Key in world-readable %PROGRAMDATA% log files. The encryption is done using a hard-coded static key and is therefore reversible by an attacker.",
"id": "GHSA-g8x8-9hp6-3ppj",
"modified": "2022-07-13T00:01:27Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:08:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-34688"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jacob-baines/vuln_disclosure/main/vuln_2021_01.txt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.remotepc.com/release-info"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-24
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis.
- For example, US government systems require FIPS 140-2 certification [REF-1192].
- Do not develop custom or private cryptographic algorithms. They will likely be exposed to attacks that are well-understood by cryptographers. Reverse engineering techniques are mature. If the algorithm can be compromised if attackers find out how it works, then it is especially weak.
- Periodically ensure that the cryptography has not become obsolete. Some older algorithms, once thought to require a billion years of computing time, can now be broken in days or hours. This includes MD4, MD5, SHA1, DES, and other algorithms that were once regarded as strong. [REF-267]
Mitigation MIT-52
Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms. With hardware, design the product at the Intellectual Property (IP) level so that one cryptographic algorithm can be replaced with another in the next generation of the hardware product.
Mitigation
Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
Mitigation MIT-4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- Industry-standard implementations will save development time and may be more likely to avoid errors that can occur during implementation of cryptographic algorithms. Consider the ESAPI Encryption feature.
Mitigation MIT-25
When using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.
CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing
An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.
CAPEC-459: Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate
An adversary exploits a weakness resulting from using a hashing algorithm with weak collision resistance to generate certificate signing requests (CSR) that contain collision blocks in their "to be signed" parts. The adversary submits one CSR to be signed by a trusted certificate authority then uses the signed blob to make a second certificate appear signed by said certificate authority. Due to the hash collision, both certificates, though different, hash to the same value and so the signed blob works just as well in the second certificate. The net effect is that the adversary's second X.509 certificate, which the Certification Authority has never seen, is now signed and validated by that Certification Authority.
CAPEC-473: Signature Spoof
An attacker generates a message or datablock that causes the recipient to believe that the message or datablock was generated and cryptographically signed by an authoritative or reputable source, misleading a victim or victim operating system into performing malicious actions.
CAPEC-475: Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation
An adversary exploits a cryptographic weakness in the signature verification algorithm implementation to generate a valid signature without knowing the key.
CAPEC-608: Cryptanalysis of Cellular Encryption
The use of cryptanalytic techniques to derive cryptographic keys or otherwise effectively defeat cellular encryption to reveal traffic content. Some cellular encryption algorithms such as A5/1 and A5/2 (specified for GSM use) are known to be vulnerable to such attacks and commercial tools are available to execute these attacks and decrypt mobile phone conversations in real-time. Newer encryption algorithms in use by UMTS and LTE are stronger and currently believed to be less vulnerable to these types of attacks. Note, however, that an attacker with a Cellular Rogue Base Station can force the use of weak cellular encryption even by newer mobile devices.
CAPEC-614: Rooting SIM Cards
SIM cards are the de facto trust anchor of mobile devices worldwide. The cards protect the mobile identity of subscribers, associate devices with phone numbers, and increasingly store payment credentials, for example in NFC-enabled phones with mobile wallets. This attack leverages over-the-air (OTA) updates deployed via cryptographically-secured SMS messages to deliver executable code to the SIM. By cracking the DES key, an attacker can send properly signed binary SMS messages to a device, which are treated as Java applets and are executed on the SIM. These applets are allowed to send SMS, change voicemail numbers, and query the phone location, among many other predefined functions. These capabilities alone provide plenty of potential for abuse.
CAPEC-97: Cryptanalysis
Cryptanalysis is a process of finding weaknesses in cryptographic algorithms and using these weaknesses to decipher the ciphertext without knowing the secret key (instance deduction). Sometimes the weakness is not in the cryptographic algorithm itself, but rather in how it is applied that makes cryptanalysis successful. An attacker may have other goals as well, such as: Total Break (finding the secret key), Global Deduction (finding a functionally equivalent algorithm for encryption and decryption that does not require knowledge of the secret key), Information Deduction (gaining some information about plaintexts or ciphertexts that was not previously known) and Distinguishing Algorithm (the attacker has the ability to distinguish the output of the encryption (ciphertext) from a random permutation of bits).