GHSA-HWCC-4CV8-CF3H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-12-22 19:51 – Updated: 2023-12-22 19:51Issue
Snowflake recently received a report about a vulnerability in the Snowflake Connector .NET where the checks against the Certificate Revocation List (CRL) were not performed where the insecureMode flag was set to false, which is the default setting. The vulnerability affects versions between 2.0.25 and 2.1.4 (inclusive). Snowflake fixed the issue in version 2.1.5.
Attack Scenario
Snowflake uses CRL to check if a TLS certificate has been revoked before its expiration date. The lack of correct validation of revoked certificates could, in theory, allow an attacker who has both access to the private key of a correctly issued Snowflake certificate and the ability to intercept network traffic to perform a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack in order to compromise Snowflake credentials used by the driver.
The vulnerability is difficult to exploit given both conditions required and, at the time of this advisory's publication, Snowflake is not aware of any compromise of its certificates, nor unauthorized issuance of such by any publicly trusted Certificate Authority (CA). However, an upgrade to the newest version is recommended to ensure the highest level of security and protection against future unforeseen threats.
Solution
On December 18, 2023, Snowflake released version 2.1.5 of the Snowflake Connector .NET, which fixes the issue, and we recommend users upgrade to version 2.1.5. Customers continuing to use the impacted versions of the connector should update their insecureMode flag to true.
Acknowledgement
Snowflake would like to thank Timo Vink for reporting this vulnerability.
Additional Information
If you discover a security vulnerability in one of our products or websites, please report the issue to HackerOne. For more information, please see our Vulnerability Disclosure Policy.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2.1.4"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "NuGet",
"name": "Snowflake.Data"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.0.25"
},
{
"fixed": "2.1.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-51662"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-295"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-12-22T19:51:09Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-12-22T17:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Issue\nSnowflake recently received a report about a vulnerability in the Snowflake Connector .NET where the checks against the Certificate Revocation List (CRL) were not performed where the insecureMode flag was set to false, which is the default setting. The vulnerability affects versions between 2.0.25 and 2.1.4 (inclusive). Snowflake fixed the issue in [version 2.1.5](https://docs.snowflake.com/release-notes/clients-drivers/dotnet-2023#version-2-1-5-december-18-2023).\n\n### Attack Scenario\nSnowflake uses CRL to check if a TLS certificate has been revoked before its expiration date. The lack of correct validation of revoked certificates could, in theory, allow an attacker who has both access to the private key of a correctly issued Snowflake certificate and the ability to intercept network traffic to perform a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack in order to compromise Snowflake credentials used by the driver.\n\nThe vulnerability is difficult to exploit given both conditions required and, at the time of this advisory\u0027s publication, Snowflake is not aware of any compromise of its certificates, nor unauthorized issuance of such by any publicly trusted Certificate Authority (CA). However, an upgrade to the newest version is recommended to ensure the highest level of security and protection against future unforeseen threats.\n\n### Solution\nOn December 18, 2023, Snowflake released [version 2.1.5](https://docs.snowflake.com/release-notes/clients-drivers/dotnet-2023#version-2-1-5-december-18-2023) of the Snowflake Connector .NET, which fixes the issue, and we recommend users upgrade to [version 2.1.5](https://docs.snowflake.com/release-notes/clients-drivers/dotnet-2023#version-2-1-5-december-18-2023). Customers continuing to use the impacted versions of the connector should update their insecureMode flag to true. \n\n### Acknowledgement\nSnowflake would like to thank [Timo Vink](https://github.com/TimoVink) for reporting this vulnerability.\n\n### Additional Information\nIf you discover a security vulnerability in one of our products or websites, please report the issue to HackerOne. For more information, please see our [Vulnerability Disclosure Policy](https://hackerone.com/snowflake?type=team).",
"id": "GHSA-hwcc-4cv8-cf3h",
"modified": "2023-12-22T19:51:09Z",
"published": "2023-12-22T19:51:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/snowflakedb/snowflake-connector-net/security/advisories/GHSA-hwcc-4cv8-cf3h"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-51662"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/snowflakedb/snowflake-connector-net/commit/49cb77ddd6e18c110eca35aa580e89d73c46cc33"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.snowflake.com/release-notes/clients-drivers/dotnet-2023#version-2-1-5-december-18-2023"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/snowflakedb/snowflake-connector-net"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Snowflake Connector .NET does not properly check the Certificate Revocation List (CRL)"
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.