GHSA-rfmp-jvr7-hx78 BIT-nifi-2020-9491 CVE-2020-9491
Inadequate Encryption Strength in Apache NiFi
High
Maven
- Severity
- 7.5 / 10
- High · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 2.87%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 86.80% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-327 Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm
- Fix
1.12.0-RC1- Upgrade org.apache.nifi:nifi to this version or later
Description
In Apache NiFi 1.2.0 to 1.11.4, the NiFi UI and API were protected by mandating TLS v1.2, as well as listening connections established by processors like ListenHTTP, HandleHttpRequest, etc. However intracluster communication such as cluster request replication, Site-to-Site, and load balanced queues continued to support TLS v1.0 or v1.1.
Affected versions
Maven
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| org.apache.nifi:nifi | >= 1.2.0, < 1.12.0-RC1 |
1.12.0-RC1 |
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.
org.apache.nifi:nifi Maven → 1.12.0-RC1
- maven
<dependency><groupId>org.apache.nifi</groupId><artifactId>nifi</artifactId><version>1.12.0-RC1</version></dependency>- gradle
implementation("org.apache.nifi:nifi:1.12.0-RC1")
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-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
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-77hf-23pq-2g7c Code injection in Apache NiFi and NiFi Registry | High | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-m5r7-w9v3-ghmx Cross-site Scripting in Apache NiFi | Medium | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-jvx9-rj3w-jq99 Origin Validation Error in Apache NiFi | High | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-qj7f-j6h9-g5rq XML External Entity Reference in Apache NiFi | Medium | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-jrcc-7jf5-3pxg Injection in Apache NiFi | Critical | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-29ph-fjf3-c5cm Apache NiFi XSS issue in context path handling | Critical | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-w4x6-j349-9r57 Apache NiFi host header poisoning issue | High | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
| GHSA-p76j-5v6v-6c22 Apache NiFi JMS Deserialization issue | High | Also affects org.apache.nifi:nifi |
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