ghsa-h3c3-6h4v-h278
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-02 06:17
Modified
2022-05-02 06:17
Details
OpenSSL 0.9.8i on the Gaisler Research LEON3 SoC on the Xilinx Virtex-II Pro FPGA uses a Fixed Width Exponentiation (FWE) algorithm for certain signature calculations, and does not verify the signature before providing it to a caller, which makes it easier for physically proximate attackers to determine the private key via a modified supply voltage for the microprocessor, related to a "fault-based attack."
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2010-0928" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2010-03-05T19:30:00Z", "severity": "MODERATE" }, "details": "OpenSSL 0.9.8i on the Gaisler Research LEON3 SoC on the Xilinx Virtex-II Pro FPGA uses a Fixed Width Exponentiation (FWE) algorithm for certain signature calculations, and does not verify the signature before providing it to a caller, which makes it easier for physically proximate attackers to determine the private key via a modified supply voltage for the microprocessor, related to a \"fault-based attack.\"", "id": "GHSA-h3c3-6h4v-h278", "modified": "2022-05-02T06:17:16Z", "published": "2022-05-02T06:17:16Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2010-0928" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/56750" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://rdist.root.org/2010/03/08/attacking-rsa-exponentiation-with-fault-injection" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.eecs.umich.edu/%7Evaleria/research/publications/DATE10RSA.pdf" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/030410-rsa-security-attack.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.osvdb.org/62808" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/04/severe_openssl_vulnerability" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [] }
Loading...
Loading...
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.