GSD-2023-31127

Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:20
Details
libspdm is a sample implementation that follows the DMTF SPDM specifications. A vulnerability has been identified in SPDM session establishment in libspdm prior to version 2.3.1. If a device supports both DHE session and PSK session with mutual authentication, the attacker may be able to establish the session with `KEY_EXCHANGE` and `PSK_FINISH` to bypass the mutual authentication. This is most likely to happen when the Requester begins a session using one method (DHE, for example) and then uses the other method's finish (PSK_FINISH in this example) to establish the session. The session hashes would be expected to fail in this case, but the condition was not detected. This issue only impacts the SPDM responder, which supports `KEY_EX_CAP=1 and `PSK_CAP=10b` at same time with mutual authentication requirement. The SPDM requester is not impacted. The SPDM responder is not impacted if `KEY_EX_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=01b`. The SPDM responder is not impacted if mutual authentication is not required. libspdm 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 are all impacted. Older branches are not maintained, but users of the 2.3 branch may receive a patch in version 2.3.2. The SPDM specification (DSP0274) does not contain this vulnerability.
Aliases
Aliases
CVE-2023-31127
To clipboard 

{
  "GSD": {
    "alias": "CVE-2023-31127",
    "id": "GSD-2023-31127"
  },
  "gsd": {
    "metadata": {
      "exploitCode": "unknown",
      "remediation": "unknown",
      "reportConfidence": "confirmed",
      "type": "vulnerability"
    },
    "osvSchema": {
      "aliases": [
        "CVE-2023-31127"
      ],
      "details": "libspdm is a sample implementation that follows the DMTF SPDM specifications. A vulnerability has been identified in SPDM session establishment in libspdm prior to version 2.3.1. If a device supports both DHE session and PSK session with mutual\nauthentication, the attacker may be able to establish the session with `KEY_EXCHANGE` and `PSK_FINISH` to bypass the mutual authentication. This is most likely to happen when the Requester begins a session using one method (DHE, for example) and then uses the other method\u0027s finish (PSK_FINISH in this example) to establish the session. The session hashes would be expected to fail in this case, but the condition was not detected.\n\nThis issue only impacts the SPDM responder, which supports `KEY_EX_CAP=1 and `PSK_CAP=10b` at same time with mutual authentication requirement. The SPDM requester is not impacted. The SPDM responder is not impacted if `KEY_EX_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=01b`. The SPDM responder is not impacted if mutual authentication is not required.\n\nlibspdm 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 are all impacted. Older branches are not maintained, but users of the 2.3 branch may receive a patch in version 2.3.2. The SPDM specification (DSP0274) does not contain this vulnerability.",
      "id": "GSD-2023-31127",
      "modified": "2023-12-13T01:20:29.904463Z",
      "schema_version": "1.4.0"
    }
  },
  "namespaces": {
    "cve.org": {
      "CVE_data_meta": {
        "ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
        "ID": "CVE-2023-31127",
        "STATE": "PUBLIC"
      },
      "affects": {
        "vendor": {
          "vendor_data": [
            {
              "product": {
                "product_data": [
                  {
                    "product_name": "libspdm",
                    "version": {
                      "version_data": [
                        {
                          "version_affected": "=",
                          "version_value": "\u003c 2.3.2"
                        }
                      ]
                    }
                  }
                ]
              },
              "vendor_name": "DMTF"
            }
          ]
        }
      },
      "data_format": "MITRE",
      "data_type": "CVE",
      "data_version": "4.0",
      "description": {
        "description_data": [
          {
            "lang": "eng",
            "value": "libspdm is a sample implementation that follows the DMTF SPDM specifications. A vulnerability has been identified in SPDM session establishment in libspdm prior to version 2.3.1. If a device supports both DHE session and PSK session with mutual\nauthentication, the attacker may be able to establish the session with `KEY_EXCHANGE` and `PSK_FINISH` to bypass the mutual authentication. This is most likely to happen when the Requester begins a session using one method (DHE, for example) and then uses the other method\u0027s finish (PSK_FINISH in this example) to establish the session. The session hashes would be expected to fail in this case, but the condition was not detected.\n\nThis issue only impacts the SPDM responder, which supports `KEY_EX_CAP=1 and `PSK_CAP=10b` at same time with mutual authentication requirement. The SPDM requester is not impacted. The SPDM responder is not impacted if `KEY_EX_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=01b`. The SPDM responder is not impacted if mutual authentication is not required.\n\nlibspdm 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 are all impacted. Older branches are not maintained, but users of the 2.3 branch may receive a patch in version 2.3.2. The SPDM specification (DSP0274) does not contain this vulnerability."
          }
        ]
      },
      "impact": {
        "cvss": [
          {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "ADJACENT_NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 9.1,
            "baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "CHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        ]
      },
      "problemtype": {
        "problemtype_data": [
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "cweId": "CWE-372",
                "lang": "eng",
                "value": "CWE-372: Incomplete Internal State Distinction"
              }
            ]
          },
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "cweId": "CWE-287",
                "lang": "eng",
                "value": "CWE-287: Improper Authentication"
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      "references": {
        "reference_data": [
          {
            "name": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/security/advisories/GHSA-qw76-4v8p-xq9f",
            "refsource": "MISC",
            "url": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/security/advisories/GHSA-qw76-4v8p-xq9f"
          },
          {
            "name": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2006",
            "refsource": "MISC",
            "url": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2006"
          },
          {
            "name": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2007",
            "refsource": "MISC",
            "url": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2007"
          }
        ]
      },
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-qw76-4v8p-xq9f",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      }
    },
    "nvd.nist.gov": {
      "configurations": {
        "CVE_data_version": "4.0",
        "nodes": [
          {
            "children": [],
            "cpe_match": [
              {
                "cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:dmtf:libspdm:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                "cpe_name": [],
                "versionEndExcluding": "2.3.2",
                "vulnerable": true
              }
            ],
            "operator": "OR"
          }
        ]
      },
      "cve": {
        "CVE_data_meta": {
          "ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
          "ID": "CVE-2023-31127"
        },
        "data_format": "MITRE",
        "data_type": "CVE",
        "data_version": "4.0",
        "description": {
          "description_data": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "libspdm is a sample implementation that follows the DMTF SPDM specifications. A vulnerability has been identified in SPDM session establishment in libspdm prior to version 2.3.1. If a device supports both DHE session and PSK session with mutual\nauthentication, the attacker may be able to establish the session with `KEY_EXCHANGE` and `PSK_FINISH` to bypass the mutual authentication. This is most likely to happen when the Requester begins a session using one method (DHE, for example) and then uses the other method\u0027s finish (PSK_FINISH in this example) to establish the session. The session hashes would be expected to fail in this case, but the condition was not detected.\n\nThis issue only impacts the SPDM responder, which supports `KEY_EX_CAP=1 and `PSK_CAP=10b` at same time with mutual authentication requirement. The SPDM requester is not impacted. The SPDM responder is not impacted if `KEY_EX_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=01b`. The SPDM responder is not impacted if mutual authentication is not required.\n\nlibspdm 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 are all impacted. Older branches are not maintained, but users of the 2.3 branch may receive a patch in version 2.3.2. The SPDM specification (DSP0274) does not contain this vulnerability."
            }
          ]
        },
        "problemtype": {
          "problemtype_data": [
            {
              "description": [
                {
                  "lang": "en",
                  "value": "CWE-287"
                }
              ]
            }
          ]
        },
        "references": {
          "reference_data": [
            {
              "name": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/security/advisories/GHSA-qw76-4v8p-xq9f",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "tags": [
                "Vendor Advisory"
              ],
              "url": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/security/advisories/GHSA-qw76-4v8p-xq9f"
            },
            {
              "name": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2007",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "tags": [
                "Patch"
              ],
              "url": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2007"
            },
            {
              "name": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2006",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "tags": [
                "Patch"
              ],
              "url": "https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/pull/2006"
            }
          ]
        }
      },
      "impact": {
        "baseMetricV3": {
          "cvssV3": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 8.8,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
          "impactScore": 5.9
        }
      },
      "lastModifiedDate": "2023-05-15T18:08Z",
      "publishedDate": "2023-05-08T21:15Z"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




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.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.