Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

GHSA-3wx7-46ch-7rq2 CVE-2022-2097 RUSTSEC-2022-0032

AES OCB fails to encrypt some bytes

Medium crates.io
Severity
7.5 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
4.90%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 92.09% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-311 Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data
CWE-326 Inadequate Encryption Strength
CWE-327 Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm
Fix
111.22.0
Upgrade openssl-src to this version or later

Description

AES OCB mode for 32-bit x86 platforms using the AES-NI assembly optimized implementation will not encrypt the entirety of the data under some circumstances. This could reveal sixteen bytes of data that was pre-existing in the memory that wasn't written. In the special case of "in place" encryption, sixteen bytes of the plaintext would be revealed.

Since OpenSSL does not support OCB based cipher suites for TLS and DTLS, they are both unaffected.

Affected versions

crates.io

PackageVulnerableFixed in
openssl-src
< 111.22.0
111.22.0
openssl-src
>= 300.0.0, < 300.0.9
300.0.9
openssl-src
>= 0.0.0-0, < 111.22.0
>= 300.0.0, < 300.0.9
111.22.0
300.0.9

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

openssl-src crates.io → 111.22.0

cargo
cargo update -p openssl-src --precise 111.22.0

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 7.5

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-311: Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data

The product does not encrypt sensitive or critical information before storage or transmission.

How to prevent it
  • Requirements: Clearly specify which data or resources are valuable enough that they should be protected by encryption. Require that any transmission or storage of this data/resource should use well-vetted encryption algorithms.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that encryption is properly integrated into the system design, including but not necessarily limited to: Encryption that is needed to store or transmit private data of the users of the system Encryption that is needed to protect the system itself from unauthorized disclosure or tampering Identify the separate needs and contexts for encryption: One-way (i.e., only the user or recipient needs to have the key). This can be achieved using public key cryptography, or other techniques in which the encrypting party (i.e., the product) does not need to have access to a private key. Two-way (i.e., the encryption can be automatically performed on behalf of a user, but the key must be available so that the plaintext can be automatically recoverable by that user). This requires storage of the private key in a format that is recoverable only by the user (or perhaps by the operating system) in a way that cannot be recovered by others. Using threat modeling or other techniques, assume that data can be compromised through a separate vulnerability or weakness, and determine where encryption will be most effective. Ensure that data that should be private is not being inadvertently exposed using weaknesses such as insecure permissions (CWE-732). [REF-7]
  • Architecture and Design: When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis. For example, US government systems require FIPS 140-2 certification. Do not develop custom or private cryptographic algorithms. They will likely be exposed to attacks that are well-understood by cryptographers. Reverse engineering techniques are mature. If the algorithm can be compromised if attackers find out how it works, then it is especially weak. Periodically ensure that the cryptography has not become obsolete. Some older algorithms, once thought to require a billion years of computing time, can now be broken in days or hours. This includes MD4, MD5, SHA1, DES, and other algorithms that were once regarded as strong. [REF-267]
  • Architecture and Design: Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: When using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.
  • Implementation: Use naming conventions and strong types to make it easier to spot when sensitive data is being used. When creating structures, objects, or other complex entities, separate the sensitive and non-sensitive data as much as possible.

CWE-326: Inadequate Encryption Strength

The product stores or transmits sensitive data using an encryption scheme that is theoretically sound, but is not strong enough for the level of protection required.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Use an encryption scheme that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field.

CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis. For example, US government systems require FIPS 140-2 certification [REF-1192]. Do not develop custom or private cryptographic algorithms. They will likely be exposed to attacks that are well-understood by cryptographers. Reverse engineering techniques are mature. If the algorithm can be compromised if attackers find out how it works, then it is especially weak. Periodically ensure that the cryptography has not become obsolete. Some older algorithms, once thought to require a billion years of computing time, can now be broken in days or hours. This includes MD4, MD5, SHA1, DES, and other algorithms that were once regarded as strong. [REF-267]
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms. With hardware, design the product at the Intellectual Property (IP) level so that one cryptographic algorithm can be replaced with another in the next generation of the hardware product.
  • Architecture and Design: Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Industry-standard implementations will save development time and may be more likely to avoid errors that can occur during implementation of cryptographic algorithms. Consider the ESAPI Encryption feature.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: When using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.

References

Advisories

Packages

Other links

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-w67w-mw4j-8qrv
openssl-src contains Read Buffer Overflow in X.509 Name Constraint
Medium Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-vrh7-x64v-7vxq
openssl-src contains `NULL` dereference during PKCS7 data verification
High Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-vxrh-cpg7-8vjr
openssl-src subject to NULL dereference validating DSA public key
High Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-r7jw-wp68-3xch
openssl-src vulnerable to Use-after-free following `BIO_new_NDEF`
High Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-v5w6-wcm8-jm4q
openssl-src contains Double free after calling `PEM_read_bio_ex`
High Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-p52g-cm5j-mjv4
openssl-src subject to Timing Oracle in RSA Decryption
Medium Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-29xx-hcv2-c4cp
openssl-src subject to Invalid pointer dereference in `d2i_PKCS7` functions
High Also affects openssl-src
GHSA-x4qr-2fvf-3mr5
Vulnerable OpenSSL included in cryptography wheels
High Also affects openssl-src
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor