GSD-2016-5672
Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:21Details
Intel Crosswalk before 19.49.514.5, 20.x before 20.50.533.11, 21.x before 21.51.546.0, and 22.x before 22.51.549.0 interprets a user's acceptance of one invalid X.509 certificate to mean that all invalid X.509 certificates should be accepted without prompting, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.
Aliases
Aliases
{
"GSD": {
"alias": "CVE-2016-5672",
"description": "Intel Crosswalk before 19.49.514.5, 20.x before 20.50.533.11, 21.x before 21.51.546.0, and 22.x before 22.51.549.0 interprets a user\u0027s acceptance of one invalid X.509 certificate to mean that all invalid X.509 certificates should be accepted without prompting, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.",
"id": "GSD-2016-5672"
},
"gsd": {
"metadata": {
"exploitCode": "unknown",
"remediation": "unknown",
"reportConfidence": "confirmed",
"type": "vulnerability"
},
"osvSchema": {
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-5672"
],
"details": "Intel Crosswalk before 19.49.514.5, 20.x before 20.50.533.11, 21.x before 21.51.546.0, and 22.x before 22.51.549.0 interprets a user\u0027s acceptance of one invalid X.509 certificate to mean that all invalid X.509 certificates should be accepted without prompting, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.",
"id": "GSD-2016-5672",
"modified": "2023-12-13T01:21:25.143632Z",
"schema_version": "1.4.0"
}
},
"namespaces": {
"cve.org": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "cert@cert.org",
"ID": "CVE-2016-5672",
"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": "Intel Crosswalk before 19.49.514.5, 20.x before 20.50.533.11, 21.x before 21.51.546.0, and 22.x before 22.51.549.0 interprets a user\u0027s acceptance of one invalid X.509 certificate to mean that all invalid X.509 certificates should be accepted without prompting, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "n/a"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://blogs.intel.com/evangelists/2016/07/28/crosswalk-security-vulnerability/",
"refsource": "CONFIRM",
"url": "https://blogs.intel.com/evangelists/2016/07/28/crosswalk-security-vulnerability/"
},
{
"name": "92199",
"refsource": "BID",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/92199"
},
{
"name": "https://wwws.nightwatchcybersecurity.com/2016/07/29/advisory-intel-crosswalk-ssl-prompt-issue",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://wwws.nightwatchcybersecurity.com/2016/07/29/advisory-intel-crosswalk-ssl-prompt-issue"
},
{
"name": "https://crosswalk-project.org/jira/browse/XWALK-6986",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://crosswalk-project.org/jira/browse/XWALK-6986"
},
{
"name": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/138107/Intel-Crosswalk-Project-Man-In-The-Middle.html",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/138107/Intel-Crosswalk-Project-Man-In-The-Middle.html"
},
{
"name": "[crosswalk-help] 20160728 Crosswalk Security Advisory",
"refsource": "MLIST",
"url": "https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/pipermail/crosswalk-help/2016-July/002167.html"
},
{
"name": "20160729 CVE-2016-5672: Intel Crosswalk SSL Prompt Issue",
"refsource": "BUGTRAQ",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/539051/100/0/threaded"
},
{
"name": "VU#217871",
"refsource": "CERT-VN",
"url": "http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/217871"
}
]
}
},
"nvd.nist.gov": {
"configurations": {
"CVE_data_version": "4.0",
"nodes": [
{
"children": [],
"cpe_match": [
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:intel:crosswalk:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"versionEndIncluding": "19.49.514.4",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
]
},
"cve": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "cert@cert.org",
"ID": "CVE-2016-5672"
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Intel Crosswalk before 19.49.514.5, 20.x before 20.50.533.11, 21.x before 21.51.546.0, and 22.x before 22.51.549.0 interprets a user\u0027s acceptance of one invalid X.509 certificate to mean that all invalid X.509 certificates should be accepted without prompting, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-310"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-20"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://wwws.nightwatchcybersecurity.com/2016/07/29/advisory-intel-crosswalk-ssl-prompt-issue",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Third Party Advisory"
],
"url": "https://wwws.nightwatchcybersecurity.com/2016/07/29/advisory-intel-crosswalk-ssl-prompt-issue"
},
{
"name": "[crosswalk-help] 20160728 Crosswalk Security Advisory",
"refsource": "MLIST",
"tags": [
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/pipermail/crosswalk-help/2016-July/002167.html"
},
{
"name": "https://crosswalk-project.org/jira/browse/XWALK-6986",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Permissions Required",
"Technical Description"
],
"url": "https://crosswalk-project.org/jira/browse/XWALK-6986"
},
{
"name": "VU#217871",
"refsource": "CERT-VN",
"tags": [
"Third Party Advisory",
"US Government Resource"
],
"url": "http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/217871"
},
{
"name": "https://blogs.intel.com/evangelists/2016/07/28/crosswalk-security-vulnerability/",
"refsource": "CONFIRM",
"tags": [
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://blogs.intel.com/evangelists/2016/07/28/crosswalk-security-vulnerability/"
},
{
"name": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/138107/Intel-Crosswalk-Project-Man-In-The-Middle.html",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Third Party Advisory",
"VDB Entry"
],
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/138107/Intel-Crosswalk-Project-Man-In-The-Middle.html"
},
{
"name": "92199",
"refsource": "BID",
"tags": [
"Third Party Advisory",
"VDB Entry"
],
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/92199"
},
{
"name": "20160729 CVE-2016-5672: Intel Crosswalk SSL Prompt Issue",
"refsource": "BUGTRAQ",
"tags": [],
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/539051/100/0/threaded"
}
]
}
},
"impact": {
"baseMetricV2": {
"cvssV2": {
"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM",
"accessVector": "NETWORK",
"authentication": "NONE",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 5.8,
"confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"integrityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N",
"version": "2.0"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 8.6,
"impactScore": 4.9,
"obtainAllPrivilege": false,
"obtainOtherPrivilege": false,
"obtainUserPrivilege": false,
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"userInteractionRequired": true
},
"baseMetricV3": {
"cvssV3": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 8.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.0"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
"impactScore": 5.2
}
},
"lastModifiedDate": "2018-10-09T20:00Z",
"publishedDate": "2016-08-01T02:59Z"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
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.
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
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.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
Loading timeline…
Loading…
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
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.
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.
Loading…
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.