CVE-2024-9143 Affecting openssl package, versions <3.0.15-r1
Threat Intelligence
Do your applications use this vulnerable package?
In a few clicks we can analyze your entire application and see what components are vulnerable in your application, and suggest you quick fixes.
Test your applications- Snyk ID SNYK-ALPINE317-OPENSSL-8235199
- published 20 Oct 2024
- disclosed 16 Oct 2024
Introduced: 16 Oct 2024
CVE-2024-9143 Open this link in a new tabHow to fix?
Upgrade Alpine:3.17 openssl to version 3.0.15-r1 or higher.
NVD Description
Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream openssl package and not the openssl package as distributed by Alpine.
See How to fix? for Alpine:3.17 relevant fixed versions and status.
Issue summary: Use of the low-level GF(2^m) elliptic curve APIs with untrusted explicit values for the field polynomial can lead to out-of-bounds memory reads or writes.
Impact summary: Out of bound memory writes can lead to an application crash or even a possibility of a remote code execution, however, in all the protocols involving Elliptic Curve Cryptography that we're aware of, either only "named curves" are supported, or, if explicit curve parameters are supported, they specify an X9.62 encoding of binary (GF(2^m)) curves that can't represent problematic input values. Thus the likelihood of existence of a vulnerable application is low.
In particular, the X9.62 encoding is used for ECC keys in X.509 certificates, so problematic inputs cannot occur in the context of processing X.509 certificates. Any problematic use-cases would have to be using an "exotic" curve encoding.
The affected APIs include: EC_GROUP_new_curve_GF2m(), EC_GROUP_new_from_params(), and various supporting BN_GF2m_*() functions.
Applications working with "exotic" explicit binary (GF(2^m)) curve parameters, that make it possible to represent invalid field polynomials with a zero constant term, via the above or similar APIs, may terminate abruptly as a result of reading or writing outside of array bounds. Remote code execution cannot easily be ruled out.
The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.
References
- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/72ae83ad214d2eef262461365a1975707f862712
- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/bc7e04d7c8d509fb78fc0e285aa948fb0da04700
- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/c0d3e4d32d2805f49bec30547f225bc4d092e1f4
- https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/fdf6723362ca51bd883295efe206cb5b1cfa5154
- https://github.openssl.org/openssl/extended-releases/commit/8efc0cbaa8ebba8e116f7b81a876a4123594d86a
- https://github.openssl.org/openssl/extended-releases/commit/9d576994cec2b7aa37a91740ea7e680810957e41
- https://openssl-library.org/news/secadv/20241016.txt
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/10/16/1
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/10/23/1
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/10/24/1
- https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20241101-0001/