gsd-2015-1571
Vulnerability from gsd
Modified
2023-12-13 01:20
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."
Aliases
Aliases
{ "GSD": { "alias": "CVE-2015-1571", "description": "** 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": "GSD-2015-1571" }, "gsd": { "metadata": { "exploitCode": "unknown", "remediation": "unknown", "reportConfidence": "confirmed", "type": "vulnerability" }, "osvSchema": { "aliases": [ "CVE-2015-1571" ], "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": "GSD-2015-1571", "modified": "2023-12-13T01:20:05.229108Z", "schema_version": "1.4.0" } }, "namespaces": { "cve.org": { "CVE_data_meta": { "ASSIGNER": "cve@mitre.org", "ID": "CVE-2015-1571", "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 ** 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.\"" } ] }, "problemtype": { "problemtype_data": [ { "description": [ { "lang": "eng", "value": "n/a" } ] } ] }, "references": { "reference_data": [ { "name": "20150129 Fortinet FortiOS Multiple Vulnerabilities", "refsource": "FULLDISC", "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2015/Jan/125" }, { "name": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf", "refsource": "MISC", "url": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf" }, { "name": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002/", "refsource": "MISC", "url": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002/" } ] } }, "nvd.nist.gov": { "cve": { "configurations": [ { "nodes": [ { "cpeMatch": [ { "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:fortinet:fortios:5.0.7:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "matchCriteriaId": "823C8357-E638-4EAE-B231-3B60263FFE52", "vulnerable": true } ], "negate": false, "operator": "OR" } ] } ], "descriptions": [ { "lang": "en", "value": "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." }, { "lang": "es", "value": "** DISPUTADA ** La implementaci\u00f3n del protocolo CAPWAP DTLS en Fortinet FortiOS 5.0 Patch 7 build 4457 utiliza el mismo certificado y clave privada a trav\u00e9s de las distintas instalaciones de los clientes, lo que hace que sea m\u00e1s f\u00e1cil para atacantes man-in-the-middle suplantar servidores SSL aprovechando la clave privada y certificado Fortinet_Factory. NOTA: FG-IR-15-002 dice \"El certificado Fortinet_Factory es \u00fanico para cada dispositivo ... Un atacante no puede por tanto perpetrar un ataque MitM\"." } ], "id": "CVE-2015-1571", "lastModified": "2024-04-11T00:53:16.470", "metrics": { "cvssMetricV2": [ { "acInsufInfo": false, "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "cvssData": { "accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "baseScore": 4.3, "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0" }, "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "impactScore": 2.9, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false, "source": "nvd@nist.gov", "type": "Primary", "userInteractionRequired": true } ] }, "published": "2015-02-10T20:59:06.263", "references": [ { "source": "cve@mitre.org", "tags": [ "Exploit" ], "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2015/Jan/125" }, { "source": "cve@mitre.org", "tags": [ "Vendor Advisory" ], "url": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-002/" }, { "source": "cve@mitre.org", "tags": [ "Exploit" ], "url": "http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/advisory/Fortinet_FortiOS_Multiple_Vulnerabilities.pdf" } ], "sourceIdentifier": "cve@mitre.org", "vulnStatus": "Modified", "weaknesses": [ { "description": [ { "lang": "en", "value": "CWE-310" } ], "source": "nvd@nist.gov", "type": "Primary" } ] } } } }
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.