Vulnerability-Lookup

alsa-2025:1330

Vulnerability from osv_almalinux

Published

2025-02-11 00:00

Modified

2025-02-12 17:22

Summary

Important: openssl security update

Details

OpenSSL is a toolkit that implements the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocols, as well as a full-strength general-purpose cryptography library.

Security Fix(es):

openssl: RFC7250 handshakes with unauthenticated servers don't abort as expected (CVE-2024-12797)

For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

References

URL

Type

	https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:1330	ADVISORY
	https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-12797	REPORT
	https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2342757	REPORT
	https://errata.almalinux.org/9/ALSA-2025-1330.html	ADVISORY

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "AlmaLinux:9",
        "name": "openssl"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1:3.2.2-6.el9_5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "AlmaLinux:9",
        "name": "openssl-devel"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1:3.2.2-6.el9_5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "AlmaLinux:9",
        "name": "openssl-libs"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1:3.2.2-6.el9_5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "AlmaLinux:9",
        "name": "openssl-perl"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1:3.2.2-6.el9_5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "details": "OpenSSL is a toolkit that implements the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocols, as well as a full-strength general-purpose cryptography library.  \n\nSecurity Fix(es):  \n\n  * openssl: RFC7250 handshakes with unauthenticated servers don\u0027t abort as expected (CVE-2024-12797)\n\n\nFor more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.\n",
  "id": "ALSA-2025:1330",
  "modified": "2025-02-12T17:22:37Z",
  "published": "2025-02-11T00:00:00Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2025:1330"
    },
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-12797"
    },
    {
      "type": "REPORT",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2342757"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://errata.almalinux.org/9/ALSA-2025-1330.html"
    }
  ],
  "related": [
    "CVE-2024-12797"
  ],
  "summary": "Important: openssl security update"
}

CVE-2024-12797 (GCVE-0-2024-12797)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-02-11 15:59 – Updated: 2025-02-18 14:01

Title

RFC7250 handshakes with unauthenticated servers don't abort as expected

Summary

Issue summary: Clients using RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs) to authenticate a server may fail to notice that the server was not authenticated, because handshakes don't abort as expected when the SSL_VERIFY_PEER verification mode is set. Impact summary: TLS and DTLS connections using raw public keys may be vulnerable to man-in-middle attacks when server authentication failure is not detected by clients. RPKs are disabled by default in both TLS clients and TLS servers. The issue only arises when TLS clients explicitly enable RPK use by the server, and the server, likewise, enables sending of an RPK instead of an X.509 certificate chain. The affected clients are those that then rely on the handshake to fail when the server's RPK fails to match one of the expected public keys, by setting the verification mode to SSL_VERIFY_PEER. Clients that enable server-side raw public keys can still find out that raw public key verification failed by calling SSL_get_verify_result(), and those that do, and take appropriate action, are not affected. This issue was introduced in the initial implementation of RPK support in OpenSSL 3.2. The FIPS modules in 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.

Severity ?

No CVSS data available.

CWE

CWE-392 - Missing Report of Error Condition

Assigner

openssl

References

URL

Tags

	https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20250211.txt	vendor-advisory
	https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/738d4f9…	patch
	https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/87ebd20…	patch
	https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/798779d…	patch

Impacted products

	Vendor	Product	Version
	OpenSSL	OpenSSL	Affected: 3.4.0 , < 3.4.1 (semver) Affected: 3.3.0 , < 3.3.3 (semver) Affected: 3.2.0 , < 3.2.4 (semver)

Date Public ?

2025-02-11 14:00

Credits

Apple Inc. Viktor Dukhovni

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-02-15T00:10:32.191Z",
          "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
          "shortName": "CVE"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2025/02/11/3"
          },
          {
            "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2025/02/11/4"
          },
          {
            "url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20250214-0001/"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CVE Program Container"
      },
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "cvssV3_1": {
              "attackComplexity": "LOW",
              "attackVector": "NETWORK",
              "availabilityImpact": "LOW",
              "baseScore": 6.3,
              "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
              "confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
              "integrityImpact": "LOW",
              "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
              "scope": "UNCHANGED",
              "userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
              "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
              "version": "3.1"
            }
          },
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2024-12797",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-02-14T20:24:14.595864Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-02-18T14:01:55.140Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "OpenSSL",
          "vendor": "OpenSSL",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "3.4.1",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.4.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.3.3",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.3.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "3.2.4",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.2.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "Apple Inc."
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Viktor Dukhovni"
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2025-02-11T14:00:00.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "Issue summary: Clients using RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs) to authenticate a\u003cbr\u003eserver may fail to notice that the server was not authenticated, because\u003cbr\u003ehandshakes don\u0027t abort as expected when the SSL_VERIFY_PEER verification mode\u003cbr\u003eis set.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eImpact summary: TLS and DTLS connections using raw public keys may be\u003cbr\u003evulnerable to man-in-middle attacks when server authentication failure is not\u003cbr\u003edetected by clients.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eRPKs are disabled by default in both TLS clients and TLS servers.  The issue\u003cbr\u003eonly arises when TLS clients explicitly enable RPK use by the server, and the\u003cbr\u003eserver, likewise, enables sending of an RPK instead of an X.509 certificate\u003cbr\u003echain.  The affected clients are those that then rely on the handshake to\u003cbr\u003efail when the server\u0027s RPK fails to match one of the expected public keys,\u003cbr\u003eby setting the verification mode to SSL_VERIFY_PEER.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eClients that enable server-side raw public keys can still find out that raw\u003cbr\u003epublic key verification failed by calling SSL_get_verify_result(), and those\u003cbr\u003ethat do, and take appropriate action, are not affected.  This issue was\u003cbr\u003eintroduced in the initial implementation of RPK support in OpenSSL 3.2.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003eThe FIPS modules in 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue."
            }
          ],
          "value": "Issue summary: Clients using RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs) to authenticate a\nserver may fail to notice that the server was not authenticated, because\nhandshakes don\u0027t abort as expected when the SSL_VERIFY_PEER verification mode\nis set.\n\nImpact summary: TLS and DTLS connections using raw public keys may be\nvulnerable to man-in-middle attacks when server authentication failure is not\ndetected by clients.\n\nRPKs are disabled by default in both TLS clients and TLS servers.  The issue\nonly arises when TLS clients explicitly enable RPK use by the server, and the\nserver, likewise, enables sending of an RPK instead of an X.509 certificate\nchain.  The affected clients are those that then rely on the handshake to\nfail when the server\u0027s RPK fails to match one of the expected public keys,\nby setting the verification mode to SSL_VERIFY_PEER.\n\nClients that enable server-side raw public keys can still find out that raw\npublic key verification failed by calling SSL_get_verify_result(), and those\nthat do, and take appropriate action, are not affected.  This issue was\nintroduced in the initial implementation of RPK support in OpenSSL 3.2.\n\nThe FIPS modules in 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "format": "other",
          "other": {
            "content": {
              "text": "High"
            },
            "type": "https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-392",
              "description": "CWE-392 Missing Report of Error Condition",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-02-11T15:59:36.719Z",
        "orgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
        "shortName": "openssl"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "OpenSSL Advisory",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20250211.txt"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.4.1 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/738d4f9fdeaad57660dcba50a619fafced3fd5e9"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.3.3 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/87ebd203feffcf92ad5889df92f90bb0ee10a699"
        },
        {
          "name": "3.2.4 git commit",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/798779d43494549b611233f92652f0da5328fbe7"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "RFC7250 handshakes with unauthenticated servers don\u0027t abort as expected",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "3a12439a-ef3a-4c79-92e6-6081a721f1e5",
    "assignerShortName": "openssl",
    "cveId": "CVE-2024-12797",
    "datePublished": "2025-02-11T15:59:36.719Z",
    "dateReserved": "2024-12-19T13:54:37.212Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-02-18T14:01:55.140Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

Sightings

Author	Source	Type	Date

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.

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Action not permitted