CVE-2025-69418
16h01 +00:00
CVE 설명
Unauthenticated/unencrypted trailing bytes with low-level OCB function calls
Issue summary: When using the low-level OCB API directly with AES-NI orother hardware-accelerated code paths, inputs whose length is not a multiple
of 16 bytes can leave the final partial block unencrypted and unauthenticated.
Impact summary: The trailing 1-15 bytes of a message may be exposed in
cleartext on encryption and are not covered by the authentication tag,
allowing an attacker to read or tamper with those bytes without detection.
The low-level OCB encrypt and decrypt routines in the hardware-accelerated
stream path process full 16-byte blocks but do not advance the input/output
pointers. The subsequent tail-handling code then operates on the original
base pointers, effectively reprocessing the beginning of the buffer while
leaving the actual trailing bytes unprocessed. The authentication checksum
also excludes the true tail bytes.
However, typical OpenSSL consumers using EVP are not affected because the
higher-level EVP and provider OCB implementations split inputs so that full
blocks and trailing partial blocks are processed in separate calls, avoiding
the problematic code path. Additionally, TLS does not use OCB ciphersuites.
The vulnerability only affects applications that call the low-level
CRYPTO_ocb128_encrypt() or CRYPTO_ocb128_decrypt() functions directly with
non-block-aligned lengths in a single call on hardware-accelerated builds.
For these reasons the issue was assessed as Low severity.
The FIPS modules in 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected
by this issue, as OCB mode is not a FIPS-approved algorithm.
OpenSSL 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.0 and 1.1.1 are vulnerable to this issue.
OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not affected by this issue.
CVE 정보
관련 약점
| 약점 이름 | 출처 | |
|---|---|---|
| Missing Cryptographic Step The product does not implement a required step in a cryptographic algorithm, resulting in weaker encryption than advertised by the algorithm. |
메트릭
| 메트릭 | 점수 | 심각도 | CVSS 벡터 | 출처 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 4 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
추가 정보
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. None The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope MetricsThe Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact MetricsThe Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Low There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Low Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no impact to availability within the impacted component. Temporal MetricsThe Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental MetricsThese metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. |
134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 |
EPSS
EPSS 점수
EPSS 백분위수
언급된 제품
구성 0
Openssl>>Openssl >> Version 부터 (포함) 1.1.1 까지 (미포함) 1.1.1ze
Openssl>>Openssl >> Version 부터 (포함) 3.0.0 까지 (미포함) 3.0.19
Openssl>>Openssl >> Version 부터 (포함) 3.3.0 까지 (미포함) 3.3.6
Openssl>>Openssl >> Version 부터 (포함) 3.4.0 까지 (미포함) 3.4.4
Openssl>>Openssl >> Version 부터 (포함) 3.5.0 까지 (미포함) 3.5.5
Openssl>>Openssl >> Version 부터 (포함) 3.6.0 까지 (미포함) 3.6.1
