-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
- Loading branch information
Showing
1 changed file
with
59 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ | ||
OpenSSL Security Advisory [3rd September 2024] | ||
============================================== | ||
|
||
Possible denial of service in X.509 name checks (CVE-2024-6119) | ||
=============================================================== | ||
|
||
Severity: Moderate | ||
|
||
Issue summary: Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS | ||
clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory | ||
address resulting in abnormal termination of the application process. | ||
|
||
Impact summary: Abnormal termination of an application can a cause a denial of | ||
service. | ||
|
||
Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking | ||
server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address when | ||
comparing the expected name with an `otherName` subject alternative name of an | ||
X.509 certificate. This may result in an exception that terminates the | ||
application program. | ||
|
||
Note that basic certificate chain validation (signatures, dates, ...) is not | ||
affected, the denial of service can occur only when the application also | ||
specifies an expected DNS name, Email address or IP address. | ||
|
||
TLS servers rarely solicit client certificates, and even when they do, they | ||
generally don't perform a name check against a "reference identifier" (expected | ||
identity), but rather extract the presented identity after checking the | ||
certificate chain. So TLS servers are generally not affected and the severity | ||
of the issue is Moderate. | ||
|
||
The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. | ||
OpenSSL 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 are also not affected by this issue. | ||
|
||
OpenSSL 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are vulnerable to this issue. | ||
|
||
OpenSSL 3.3 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.3.2 | ||
|
||
OpenSSL 3.2 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.2.3 | ||
|
||
OpenSSL 3.1 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.1.7 | ||
|
||
OpenSSL 3.0 users should upgrade to OpenSSL 3.0.15 | ||
|
||
This issue was reported on 16th June 2024 by David Benjamin (Google), | ||
reiterating an AddressSanitizer issue raised on 30th September 2021. The fix | ||
was developed by Viktor Dukhovni. | ||
|
||
General Advisory Notes | ||
====================== | ||
|
||
URL for this Security Advisory: | ||
https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20240903.txt | ||
|
||
Note: the online version of the advisory may be updated with additional details | ||
over time. | ||
|
||
For details of OpenSSL severity classifications please see: | ||
https://openssl-library.org/policies/general/security-policy/ |