github - ghsa-5wj2-9pm2-74vm

ghsa-5wj2-9pm2-74vm

Vulnerability from github

Published

2022-05-24 17:16

Modified

2022-05-24 17:16

Severity ?

5.3 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Details

** DISPUTED ** A certain Postfix 2.10.1-7 package could allow an attacker to send an email from an arbitrary-looking sender via a homoglyph attack, as demonstrated by the similarity of \xce\xbf to the 'o' character. This is potentially relevant when the /etc/postfix/sender_login feature is used, because a spoofed outbound message that uses a configured sender address is blocked with a "Sender address rejected: not logged in" error message, but a spoofed outbound message that uses a homoglyph of a configured sender address is not blocked. NOTE: some third parties argue that any missed blocking of spoofed outbound messages - except for exact matches to a sender address in the /etc/postfix/sender_login file - is outside the design goals of Postfix and thus cannot be considered a Postfix vulnerability.

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2020-12063"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2020-04-24T12:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "** DISPUTED ** A certain Postfix 2.10.1-7 package could allow an attacker to send an email from an arbitrary-looking sender via a homoglyph attack, as demonstrated by the similarity of \\xce\\xbf to the \u0027o\u0027 character. This is potentially relevant when the /etc/postfix/sender_login feature is used, because a spoofed outbound message that uses a configured sender address is blocked with a \"Sender address rejected: not logged in\" error message, but a spoofed outbound message that uses a homoglyph of a configured sender address is not blocked. NOTE: some third parties argue that any missed blocking of spoofed outbound messages - except for exact matches to a sender address in the /etc/postfix/sender_login file - is outside the design goals of Postfix and thus cannot be considered a Postfix vulnerability.",
  "id": "GHSA-5wj2-9pm2-74vm",
  "modified": "2022-05-24T17:16:25Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:16:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-12063"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/12"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/3"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

cve-2020-12063

Vulnerability from cvelistv5

Published

2020-04-24 11:59

Modified

2024-08-04 11:48

Severity ?

Summary

A certain Postfix 2.10.1-7 package could allow an attacker to send an email from an arbitrary-looking sender via a homoglyph attack, as demonstrated by the similarity of \xce\xbf to the 'o' character. This is potentially relevant when the /etc/postfix/sender_login feature is used, because a spoofed outbound message that uses a configured sender address is blocked with a "Sender address rejected: not logged in" error message, but a spoofed outbound message that uses a homoglyph of a configured sender address is not blocked. NOTE: some third parties argue that any missed blocking of spoofed outbound messages - except for exact matches to a sender address in the /etc/postfix/sender_login file - is outside the design goals of Postfix and thus cannot be considered a Postfix vulnerability

References

▼	URL	Tags
	https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/3	x_refsource_MISC
	https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/12	x_refsource_MISC

Impacted products

Vendor

Product

Version

▼

n/a

Version: n/a

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-08-04T11:48:57.775Z",
          "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
          "shortName": "CVE"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/3"
          },
          {
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/12"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CVE Program Container"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "n/a",
          "vendor": "n/a",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "n/a"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A certain Postfix 2.10.1-7 package could allow an attacker to send an email from an arbitrary-looking sender via a homoglyph attack, as demonstrated by the similarity of \\xce\\xbf to the \u0027o\u0027 character. This is potentially relevant when the /etc/postfix/sender_login feature is used, because a spoofed outbound message that uses a configured sender address is blocked with a \"Sender address rejected: not logged in\" error message, but a spoofed outbound message that uses a homoglyph of a configured sender address is not blocked. NOTE: some third parties argue that any missed blocking of spoofed outbound messages - except for exact matches to a sender address in the /etc/postfix/sender_login file - is outside the design goals of Postfix and thus cannot be considered a Postfix vulnerability"
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "description": "n/a",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "text"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2020-04-24T12:05:42",
        "orgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
        "shortName": "mitre"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/3"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/12"
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        "disputed"
      ],
      "x_legacyV4Record": {
        "CVE_data_meta": {
          "ASSIGNER": "cve@mitre.org",
          "ID": "CVE-2020-12063",
          "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 ** A certain Postfix 2.10.1-7 package could allow an attacker to send an email from an arbitrary-looking sender via a homoglyph attack, as demonstrated by the similarity of \\xce\\xbf to the \u0027o\u0027 character. This is potentially relevant when the /etc/postfix/sender_login feature is used, because a spoofed outbound message that uses a configured sender address is blocked with a \"Sender address rejected: not logged in\" error message, but a spoofed outbound message that uses a homoglyph of a configured sender address is not blocked. NOTE: some third parties argue that any missed blocking of spoofed outbound messages - except for exact matches to a sender address in the /etc/postfix/sender_login file - is outside the design goals of Postfix and thus cannot be considered a Postfix vulnerability."
            }
          ]
        },
        "problemtype": {
          "problemtype_data": [
            {
              "description": [
                {
                  "lang": "eng",
                  "value": "n/a"
                }
              ]
            }
          ]
        },
        "references": {
          "reference_data": [
            {
              "name": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/3",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/3"
            },
            {
              "name": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/12",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "url": "https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/04/23/12"
            }
          ]
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
    "assignerShortName": "mitre",
    "cveId": "CVE-2020-12063",
    "datePublished": "2020-04-24T11:59:03",
    "dateReserved": "2020-04-22T00:00:00",
    "dateUpdated": "2024-08-04T11:48:57.775Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

Sightings

Author	Source	Type	Date

Nomenclature

Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.

Action not permitted