OpenSSL: Out-of-bounds Write
CVE-2022-3602 is a high-severity out-of-bounds write vulnerability in OpenSSL, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 90.8% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is in the top 0.19% of all scored CVEs.
Exploitation in the next 30 days is more likely than not, according to EPSS.
What to do
- Update Calibre ICE to V2023.1 or a later version.
- Update Mcenter to V5.3.0 or a later version.
- Update SCALANCE X204RNA (HSR) to V3.2.8 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on packetstormsecurity.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| OpenSSL | OpenSSL | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Siemens | Calibre ICE | V2022.4 up to, but not including, V2023.1 | V2023.1 |
| Siemens | Mcenter | V5.2.1 up to, but not including, V5.3.0 | V5.3.0 |
| Siemens | SCALANCE X204RNA (HSR) | V3.2.7 up to, but not including, V3.2.8 | V3.2.8 |
| Siemens | SCALANCE X204RNA (PRP) | V3.2.7 up to, but not including, V3.2.8 | V3.2.8 |
| Siemens | SCALANCE X204RNA EEC (HSR) | V3.2.7 up to, but not including, V3.2.8 | V3.2.8 |
| Siemens | SCALANCE X204RNA EEC (PRP) | V3.2.7 up to, but not including, V3.2.8 | V3.2.8 |
| Siemens | SCALANCE X204RNA EEC (PRP/HSR) | V3.2.7 up to, but not including, V3.2.8 | V3.2.8 |
| Siemens | SICAM GridPass | V1.80 up to, but not including, V2.20 | V2.20 |
| Siemens | SIMATIC RTLS Locating Manager | V2.13.0.0 up to, but not including, V2.13.0.3 | V2.13.0.3 |
| Fedora Project | Fedora | 36; 37; 26; 27 | Not stated |
| NetApp | Clustered Data Ontap | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Node.js | Node.js | 18.0.0 up to, but not including, 18.11.0; 18.12.0; 19.0.0 | 18.11.0 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- NoneNothing can be modified.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.5 | High | NVD |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.5 | High | CISA (ADP) |
Official description
A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed the malicious certificate or for the application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address to overflow four attacker-controlled bytes on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service) or potentially remote code execution. Many platforms implement stack overflow protections which would mitigate against the risk of remote code execution. The risk may be further mitigated based on stack layout for any given platform/compiler. Pre-announcements of CVE-2022-3602 described this issue as CRITICAL. Further analysis based on some of the mitigating factors described above have led this to be downgraded to HIGH. Users are still encouraged to upgrade to a new version as soon as possible. In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.7 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2,3.0.3,3.0.4,3.0.5,3.0.6).
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Out-of-bounds Write
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
- Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Advisories
- packetstormsecurity.com/files/169687/OpenSSL-Security-Advisory-20221101.htmlThird Party Advisory, VDB Entry
- psirt.global.sonicwall.com/vuln-detail/SNWLID-2022-0023Third Party Advisory
- openssl.org/news/secadv/20221101.txt
Third-party and government advisories
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/15Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/16Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/17Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/18Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/19Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/20Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/21Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/01/24Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/1Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/10Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/11Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/12Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/13Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/14Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
- openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/11/02/15Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
Other references
Other vulnerabilities in OpenSSL
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.2 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 9.1 Critical severity
Recent Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Apple iOS and iPadOS Out-of-Bounds Write Exploited
- 7.8 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.