There is a type confusion vulnerability relating to X.400 address processing
inside an X.509 GeneralName. X.400 addresses were parsed as an ASN1_STRING but
the public structure definition for GENERAL_NAME incorrectly specified the type
of the x400Address field as ASN1_TYPE. This field is subsequently interpreted by
the OpenSSL function GENERAL_NAME_cmp as an ASN1_TYPE rather than an
ASN1_STRING.
When CRL checking is enabled (i.e. the application sets the
X509_V_FLAG_CRL_CHECK flag), this vulnerability may allow an attacker to pass
arbitrary pointers to a memcmp call, enabling them to read memory contents or
enact a denial of service. In most cases, the attack requires the attacker to
provide both the certificate chain and CRL, neither of which need to have a
valid signature. If the attacker only controls one of these inputs, the other
input must already contain an X.400 address as a CRL distribution point, which
is uncommon. As such, this vulnerability is most likely to only affect
applications which have implemented their own functionality for retrieving CRLs
over a network.
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
References
History
Thu, 13 Feb 2025 16:45:00 +0000
Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
---|---|---|
Description | There is a type confusion vulnerability relating to X.400 address processing inside an X.509 GeneralName. X.400 addresses were parsed as an ASN1_STRING but the public structure definition for GENERAL_NAME incorrectly specified the type of the x400Address field as ASN1_TYPE. This field is subsequently interpreted by the OpenSSL function GENERAL_NAME_cmp as an ASN1_TYPE rather than an ASN1_STRING. When CRL checking is enabled (i.e. the application sets the X509_V_FLAG_CRL_CHECK flag), this vulnerability may allow an attacker to pass arbitrary pointers to a memcmp call, enabling them to read memory contents or enact a denial of service. In most cases, the attack requires the attacker to provide both the certificate chain and CRL, neither of which need to have a valid signature. If the attacker only controls one of these inputs, the other input must already contain an X.400 address as a CRL distribution point, which is uncommon. As such, this vulnerability is most likely to only affect applications which have implemented their own functionality for retrieving CRLs over a network. | There is a type confusion vulnerability relating to X.400 address processing inside an X.509 GeneralName. X.400 addresses were parsed as an ASN1_STRING but the public structure definition for GENERAL_NAME incorrectly specified the type of the x400Address field as ASN1_TYPE. This field is subsequently interpreted by the OpenSSL function GENERAL_NAME_cmp as an ASN1_TYPE rather than an ASN1_STRING. When CRL checking is enabled (i.e. the application sets the X509_V_FLAG_CRL_CHECK flag), this vulnerability may allow an attacker to pass arbitrary pointers to a memcmp call, enabling them to read memory contents or enact a denial of service. In most cases, the attack requires the attacker to provide both the certificate chain and CRL, neither of which need to have a valid signature. If the attacker only controls one of these inputs, the other input must already contain an X.400 address as a CRL distribution point, which is uncommon. As such, this vulnerability is most likely to only affect applications which have implemented their own functionality for retrieving CRLs over a network. |
Thu, 12 Sep 2024 02:15:00 +0000
Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
---|---|---|
First Time appeared |
Redhat logging
|
|
CPEs | cpe:/a:redhat:logging:5.9::el9 | |
Vendors & Products |
Redhat logging
|
Thu, 08 Aug 2024 19:00:00 +0000
Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
---|---|---|
CPEs | cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_aus:7.7 |

Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: openssl
Published: 2023-02-08T19:01:50.514Z
Updated: 2025-02-13T16:38:54.991Z
Reserved: 2023-01-13T10:40:41.259Z
Link: CVE-2023-0286

No data.

Status : Modified
Published: 2023-02-08T20:15:24.267
Modified: 2025-02-13T17:15:54.377
Link: CVE-2023-0286
