GSD-2020-15813
Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:21Details
Graylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the "Allow self-signed certificates" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog's authentication mechanism.
Aliases
Aliases
{
"GSD": {
"alias": "CVE-2020-15813",
"description": "Graylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the \"Allow self-signed certificates\" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog\u0027s authentication mechanism.",
"id": "GSD-2020-15813"
},
"gsd": {
"metadata": {
"exploitCode": "unknown",
"remediation": "unknown",
"reportConfidence": "confirmed",
"type": "vulnerability"
},
"osvSchema": {
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-15813"
],
"details": "Graylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the \"Allow self-signed certificates\" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog\u0027s authentication mechanism.",
"id": "GSD-2020-15813",
"modified": "2023-12-13T01:21:44.056947Z",
"schema_version": "1.4.0"
}
},
"namespaces": {
"cve.org": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "cve@mitre.org",
"ID": "CVE-2020-15813",
"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": "Graylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the \"Allow self-signed certificates\" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog\u0027s authentication mechanism."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "n/a"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/Graylog2/graylog2-server/issues/5906",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/Graylog2/graylog2-server/issues/5906"
}
]
}
},
"gitlab.com": {
"advisories": [
{
"affected_range": "(,3.3.3)",
"affected_versions": "All versions before 3.3.3",
"cvss_v2": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P",
"cvss_v3": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1035",
"CWE-295",
"CWE-937"
],
"date": "2022-02-10",
"description": "Graylog lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the \"Allow self-signed certificates\" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog\u0027s authentication mechanism.",
"fixed_versions": [
"3.3.3"
],
"identifier": "CVE-2020-15813",
"identifiers": [
"GHSA-3gg9-f3vh-866f",
"CVE-2020-15813"
],
"not_impacted": "All versions starting from 3.3.3",
"package_slug": "maven/org.graylog/graylog-parent",
"pubdate": "2022-02-10",
"solution": "Upgrade to version 3.3.3 or above.",
"title": "Improper Certificate Validation",
"urls": [
"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-15813",
"https://github.com/Graylog2/graylog2-server/issues/5906",
"https://github.com/Graylog2/graylog2-server/pull/8569",
"https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-3gg9-f3vh-866f"
],
"uuid": "837e544f-9bb6-4b10-85b8-e0fee7079cbc"
},
{
"affected_range": "(,3.3.3)",
"affected_versions": "All versions before 3.3.3",
"cvss_v2": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P",
"cvss_v3": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1035",
"CWE-295",
"CWE-937"
],
"date": "2020-07-22",
"description": "Graylog lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections.",
"fixed_versions": [],
"identifier": "CVE-2020-15813",
"identifiers": [
"CVE-2020-15813"
],
"not_impacted": "",
"package_slug": "maven/org.graylog2/graylog2-server",
"pubdate": "2020-07-17",
"solution": "Unfortunately, there is no solution available yet.",
"title": "Improper Certificate Validation",
"urls": [
"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-15813"
],
"uuid": "7d3147eb-2452-4cf0-95d3-4181e042bd18"
}
]
},
"nvd.nist.gov": {
"configurations": {
"CVE_data_version": "4.0",
"nodes": [
{
"children": [],
"cpe_match": [
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:graylog:graylog:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"versionEndExcluding": "3.3.3",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
]
},
"cve": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "cve@mitre.org",
"ID": "CVE-2020-15813"
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Graylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the \"Allow self-signed certificates\" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog\u0027s authentication mechanism."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-295"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/Graylog2/graylog2-server/issues/5906",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Third Party Advisory"
],
"url": "https://github.com/Graylog2/graylog2-server/issues/5906"
}
]
}
},
"impact": {
"baseMetricV2": {
"acInsufInfo": false,
"cvssV2": {
"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM",
"accessVector": "NETWORK",
"authentication": "NONE",
"availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"baseScore": 6.8,
"confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"integrityImpact": "PARTIAL",
"vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P",
"version": "2.0"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 8.6,
"impactScore": 6.4,
"obtainAllPrivilege": false,
"obtainOtherPrivilege": false,
"obtainUserPrivilege": false,
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"userInteractionRequired": false
},
"baseMetricV3": {
"cvssV3": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 2.2,
"impactScore": 5.9
}
},
"lastModifiedDate": "2020-07-22T15:03Z",
"publishedDate": "2020-07-17T19:15Z"
}
}
}
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.