GSD-2015-1571

Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:20
Details
** DISPUTED ** The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers' installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key. NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says "The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack."
Aliases
Aliases
CVE-2015-1571
To clipboard 

{
  "GSD": {
    "alias": "CVE-2015-1571",
    "description": "** DISPUTED ** The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers\u0027 installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key.  NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says \"The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack.\"",
    "id": "GSD-2015-1571"
  },
  "gsd": {
    "metadata": {
      "exploitCode": "unknown",
      "remediation": "unknown",
      "reportConfidence": "confirmed",
      "type": "vulnerability"
    },
    "osvSchema": {
      "aliases": [
        "CVE-2015-1571"
      ],
      "details": "** DISPUTED ** The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers\u0027 installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key.  NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says \"The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack.\"",
      "id": "GSD-2015-1571",
      "modified": "2023-12-13T01:20:05.229108Z",
      "schema_version": "1.4.0"
    }
  },
  "namespaces": {
    "cve.org": {
      "CVE_data_meta": {
        "ASSIGNER": "cve@mitre.org",
        "ID": "CVE-2015-1571",
        "STATE": "PUBLIC"
      },
      "affects": {
        "vendor": {
          "vendor_data": [
            {
              "product": {
                "product_data": [
                  {
                    "product_name": "n/a",
                    "version": {
                      "version_data": [
                        {
                          "version_value": "n/a"
                        }
                      ]
                    }
                  }
                ]
              },
              "vendor_name": "n/a"
            }
          ]
        }
      },
      "data_format": "MITRE",
      "data_type": "CVE",
      "data_version": "4.0",
      "description": {
        "description_data": [
          {
            "lang": "eng",
            "value": "** DISPUTED ** The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers\u0027 installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key.  NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says \"The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack.\""
          }
        ]
      },
      "problemtype": {
        "problemtype_data": [
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "lang": "eng",
                "value": "n/a"
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      "references": {
        "reference_data": [
          {
            "name": "20150129 Fortinet FortiOS Multiple Vulnerabilities",
            "refsource": "FULLDISC",
            "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2015/Jan/125"
          },
          {
            "name": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf",
            "refsource": "MISC",
            "url": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf"
          },
          {
            "name": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002/",
            "refsource": "MISC",
            "url": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002/"
          }
        ]
      }
    },
    "nvd.nist.gov": {
      "cve": {
        "configurations": [
          {
            "nodes": [
              {
                "cpeMatch": [
                  {
                    "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:fortinet:fortios:5.0.7:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                    "matchCriteriaId": "823C8357-E638-4EAE-B231-3B60263FFE52",
                    "vulnerable": true
                  }
                ],
                "negate": false,
                "operator": "OR"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "descriptions": [
          {
            "lang": "en",
            "value": "The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers\u0027 installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key.  NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says \"The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack."
          },
          {
            "lang": "es",
            "value": "** DISPUTADA ** La implementaci\u00f3n del protocolo CAPWAP DTLS en Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 utiliza el mismo certificado y clave privada a trav\u00e9s de las distintas instalaciones de los clientes, lo que hace que sea m\u00e1s f\u00e1cil para atacantes man-in-the-middle suplantar servidores SSL aprovechando la clave privada y certificado Fortinet_Factory. NOTA: FG-IR-15-002 dice \"El certificado Fortinet_Factory es \u00fanico para cada dispositivo ... Un atacante no puede por tanto perpetrar un ataque MitM\"."
          }
        ],
        "id": "CVE-2015-1571",
        "lastModified": "2024-04-11T00:53:16.470",
        "metrics": {
          "cvssMetricV2": [
            {
              "acInsufInfo": false,
              "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
              "cvssData": {
                "accessComplexity": "MEDIUM",
                "accessVector": "NETWORK",
                "authentication": "NONE",
                "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
                "baseScore": 4.3,
                "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
                "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL",
                "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N",
                "version": "2.0"
              },
              "exploitabilityScore": 8.6,
              "impactScore": 2.9,
              "obtainAllPrivilege": false,
              "obtainOtherPrivilege": false,
              "obtainUserPrivilege": false,
              "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
              "type": "Primary",
              "userInteractionRequired": true
            }
          ]
        },
        "published": "2015-02-10T20:59:06.263",
        "references": [
          {
            "source": "cve@mitre.org",
            "tags": [
              "Exploit"
            ],
            "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2015/Jan/125"
          },
          {
            "source": "cve@mitre.org",
            "tags": [
              "Vendor Advisory"
            ],
            "url": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002/"
          },
          {
            "source": "cve@mitre.org",
            "tags": [
              "Exploit"
            ],
            "url": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf"
          }
        ],
        "sourceIdentifier": "cve@mitre.org",
        "vulnStatus": "Modified",
        "weaknesses": [
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "lang": "en",
                "value": "CWE-310"
              }
            ],
            "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
            "type": "Primary"
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

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.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.


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.