GHSA-J86Q-W3F9-5Q6C

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:11 – Updated: 2024-03-21 03:33
VLAI?
Details

** DISPUTED ** The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers' installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key. NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says "The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack."

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2015-1571"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2015-02-10T20:59:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "** DISPUTED ** The CAPWAP DTLS protocol implementation in Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 uses the same certificate and private key across different customers\u0027 installations, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers by leveraging the Fortinet_Factory certificate and private key.  NOTE: FG-IR-15-002 says \"The Fortinet_Factory certificate is unique to each device ... An attacker cannot therefore stage a MitM attack.\"",
  "id": "GHSA-j86q-w3f9-5q6c",
  "modified": "2024-03-21T03:33:11Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T04:11:07Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-1571"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2015/Jan/125"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.


Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…