FKIE_CVE-2023-6937

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2024-02-15 18:15 - Updated: 2025-02-21 15:03
Severity ?
5.3 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
5.3 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Summary
wolfSSL prior to 5.6.6 did not check that messages in one (D)TLS record do not span key boundaries. As a result, it was possible to combine (D)TLS messages using different keys into one (D)TLS record. The most extreme edge case is that, in (D)TLS 1.3, it was possible that an unencrypted (D)TLS 1.3 record from the server containing first a ServerHello message and then the rest of the first server flight would be accepted by a wolfSSL client. In (D)TLS 1.3 the handshake is encrypted after the ServerHello but a wolfSSL client would accept an unencrypted flight from the server. This does not compromise key negotiation and authentication so it is assigned a low severity rating.
References
facts@wolfssl.comhttps://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/7029Issue Tracking, Patch
facts@wolfssl.comhttps://www.wolfssl.com/docs/security-vulnerabilities/Vendor Advisory
af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/7029Issue Tracking, Patch
af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108https://www.wolfssl.com/docs/security-vulnerabilities/Vendor Advisory
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
wolfssl wolfssl *
To clipboard 

{
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:wolfssl:wolfssl:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "57DCDF61-F982-41D7-83BE-DDAEC85A797A",
              "versionEndExcluding": "5.6.6",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "wolfSSL prior to 5.6.6 did not check that messages in one (D)TLS record do not span key boundaries. As a result, it was possible to combine (D)TLS messages using different keys into one (D)TLS record. The most extreme edge case is that, in (D)TLS 1.3, it was possible that an unencrypted (D)TLS 1.3 record from the server containing first a ServerHello message and then the rest of the first server flight would be accepted by a wolfSSL client. In (D)TLS 1.3 the handshake is encrypted after the ServerHello but a wolfSSL client would accept an unencrypted flight from the server. This does not compromise key negotiation and authentication so it is assigned a low severity rating."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "wolfSSL anterior a 5.6.6 no verificaba que los mensajes en un registro (D)TLS no abarquen l\u00edmites clave. Como resultado, fue posible combinar mensajes (D)TLS usando diferentes claves en un registro (D)TLS. El caso m\u00e1s extremo es que, en (D)TLS 1.3, era posible que un registro (D)TLS 1.3 no cifrado del servidor que contuviera primero un mensaje ServerHello y luego el resto del primer vuelo del servidor fuera aceptado por un wolfSSL. cliente. En (D)TLS 1.3, el protocolo de enlace se cifra despu\u00e9s de ServerHello, pero un cliente wolfSSL aceptar\u00eda un vuelo sin cifrar desde el servidor. Esto no compromete la negociaci\u00f3n y autenticaci\u00f3n de claves, por lo que se le asigna una calificaci\u00f3n de gravedad baja."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2023-6937",
  "lastModified": "2025-02-21T15:03:59.663",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 5.3,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
        "impactScore": 1.4,
        "source": "facts@wolfssl.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      },
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 5.3,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
        "impactScore": 1.4,
        "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
        "type": "Primary"
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2024-02-15T18:15:44.890",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "facts@wolfssl.com",
      "tags": [
        "Issue Tracking",
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/7029"
    },
    {
      "source": "facts@wolfssl.com",
      "tags": [
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://www.wolfssl.com/docs/security-vulnerabilities/"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Issue Tracking",
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/7029"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://www.wolfssl.com/docs/security-vulnerabilities/"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "facts@wolfssl.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-20"
        }
      ],
      "source": "facts@wolfssl.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    },
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "NVD-CWE-Other"
        }
      ],
      "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
      "type": "Primary"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




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.