Skip to content

GHSA-wx54-3278-m5g4 CVE-2022-22976

Integer overflow in BCrypt class in Spring Security

Medium Maven
Severity
5.3 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
2.34%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 83.65% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-190 Integer Overflow or Wraparound
Fix
5.5.7
Upgrade org.springframework.security:spring-security-core to this version or later

Description

Spring Security versions 5.5.x prior to 5.5.7, 5.6.x prior to 5.6.4, and earlier unsupported versions contain an integer overflow vulnerability. When using the BCrypt class with the maximum work factor (31), the encoder does not perform any salt rounds, due to an integer overflow error. The default settings are not affected by this CVE.

Affected versions

Maven

PackageVulnerableFixed in
org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
>= 5.2.0.RELEASE, < 5.5.7
5.5.7
org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
>= 5.6.0, < 5.6.4
5.6.4

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.springframework.security:spring-security-core Maven → 5.5.7

maven
<dependency><groupId>org.springframework.security</groupId><artifactId>spring-security-core</artifactId><version>5.5.7</version></dependency>
gradle
implementation("org.springframework.security:spring-security-core:5.5.7")

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 5.3

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

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

Weakness

CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

How to prevent it
  • Requirements: Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
  • Requirements: Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • 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]. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++). [REF-106]
  • Implementation: Perform input validation on any numeric input by ensuring that it is within the expected range. Enforce that the input meets both the minimum and maximum requirements for the expected range. Use unsigned integers where possible. This makes it easier to perform validation for integer overflows. When signed integers are required, ensure that the range check includes minimum values as well as maximum values.
  • Implementation: Understand the programming language's underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation (CWE-681). Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, "not-a-number" calculations, and how the language handles numbers that are too large or too small for its underlying representation. [REF-7] Also be careful to account for 32-bit, 64-bit, and other potential differences that may affect the numeric representation.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: Examine compiler warnings closely and eliminate problems with potential security implications, such as signed / unsigned mismatch in memory operations, or use of uninitialized variables. Even if the weakness is rarely exploitable, a single failure may lead to the compromise of the entire system.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-vxf7-qj7q-83fh
Spring Security Vulnerable to User Attribute Enumeration when Using DaoAuthenticationProvider
Low Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-x2wq-9x2f-fhj7
Spring Security Core has a TOCTOU race condition when One-Time Token login with JdbcOneTimeTokenService is configured
Medium Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-vqxh-445g-37fc
Spring Security has a broken timing attack mitigation implemented in DaoAuthenticationProvide
Medium Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-8v5q-rhf3-jphm
Spring Security annotation detection mechanism has authorization bypass
High Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-9pp5-9c7g-4r83
Spring Security authorization bypass for method security annotations on private methods
Critical Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-hh3m-g4qj-4835
Spring Security Vulnerable to Authorization Bypass via Security Annotations
Medium Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-q3v6-hm2v-pw99
Spring Framework has Authorization Bypass for Case Sensitive Comparisons
Medium Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
GHSA-hmqf-wpq9-jq83
Spring Security Missing Authorization vulnerability
High Also affects org.springframework.security:spring-security-core
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