ghsa-x4jg-mjrx-434g
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-03-18 23:10
Modified
2022-03-30 20:07
Severity ?
7.5 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Summary
Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature in node-forge
Details

Impact

RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code does not check for tailing garbage bytes after decoding a DigestInfo ASN.1 structure. This can allow padding bytes to be removed and garbage data added to forge a signature when a low public exponent is being used.

Patches

The issue has been addressed in node-forge 1.3.0.

References

For more information, please see "Bleichenbacher's RSA signature forgery based on implementation error" by Hal Finney.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in forge * Email us at example email address

Show details on source website

To clipboard 

{
   affected: [
      {
         package: {
            ecosystem: "npm",
            name: "node-forge",
         },
         ranges: [
            {
               events: [
                  {
                     introduced: "0",
                  },
                  {
                     fixed: "1.3.0",
                  },
               ],
               type: "ECOSYSTEM",
            },
         ],
      },
   ],
   aliases: [
      "CVE-2022-24772",
   ],
   database_specific: {
      cwe_ids: [
         "CWE-347",
      ],
      github_reviewed: true,
      github_reviewed_at: "2022-03-18T23:10:28Z",
      nvd_published_at: "2022-03-18T14:15:00Z",
      severity: "HIGH",
   },
   details: "### Impact\n\nRSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code does not check for tailing garbage bytes after decoding a `DigestInfo` ASN.1 structure. This can allow padding bytes to be removed and garbage data added to forge a signature when a low public exponent is being used.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe issue has been addressed in `node-forge` `1.3.0`.\n\n### References\n\nFor more information, please see\n[\"Bleichenbacher's RSA signature forgery based on implementation error\"](https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/5rnE9ZRN1AokBVj3VqblGlP63QE/)\nby Hal Finney.\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Open an issue in [forge](https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge)\n* Email us at [example email address](mailto:security@digitalbazaar.com)",
   id: "GHSA-x4jg-mjrx-434g",
   modified: "2022-03-30T20:07:56Z",
   published: "2022-03-18T23:10:28Z",
   references: [
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/security/advisories/GHSA-x4jg-mjrx-434g",
      },
      {
         type: "ADVISORY",
         url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-24772",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/commit/3f0b49a0573ef1bb7af7f5673c0cfebf00424df1",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/commit/bb822c02df0b61211836472e29b9790cc541cdb2",
      },
      {
         type: "PACKAGE",
         url: "https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge",
      },
   ],
   schema_version: "1.4.0",
   severity: [
      {
         score: "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
         type: "CVSS_V3",
      },
   ],
   summary: "Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature in node-forge",
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.

Security Advisory comment format.

This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.

UUIDv4 of the comment
UUIDv4 of the Vulnerability-Lookup instance
When the comment was created originally
When the comment was last updated
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
The identifier of the vulnerability (CVE ID, GHSA-ID, PYSEC ID, etc.).



Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




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.