Excessive Iteration Affecting openssl package, versions <3.1.1-r4
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-WOLFILATEST-OPENSSL-5847050
- published 21 Aug 2023
- disclosed 31 Jul 2023
Introduced: 31 Jul 2023
CVE-2023-3817 Open this link in a new tabHow to fix?
Upgrade Wolfi openssl to version 3.1.1-r4 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 Wolfi.
See How to fix? for Wolfi relevant fixed versions and status.
Issue summary: Checking excessively long DH keys or parameters may be very slow.
Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_check(), DH_check_ex() or EVP_PKEY_param_check() to check a DH key or DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service.
The function DH_check() performs various checks on DH parameters. After fixing CVE-2023-3446 it was discovered that a large q parameter value can also trigger an overly long computation during some of these checks. A correct q value, if present, cannot be larger than the modulus p parameter, thus it is unnecessary to perform these checks if q is larger than p.
An application that calls DH_check() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack.
The function DH_check() is itself called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_ex() and EVP_PKEY_param_check().
Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL dhparam and pkeyparam command line applications when using the "-check" option.
The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue.
The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.
References
- http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2023/Jul/43
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/07/31/1
- https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=6a1eb62c29db6cb5eec707f9338aee00f44e26f5
- https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=869ad69aadd985c7b8ca6f4e5dd0eb274c9f3644
- https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=9002fd07327a91f35ba6c1307e71fa6fd4409b7f
- https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=91ddeba0f2269b017dc06c46c993a788974b1aa5
- https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20230731.txt
- https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2023/08/msg00019.html
- https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20230818-0014/
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/09/22/9
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/09/22/11
- https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20231027-0008/
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2023/11/06/2
- https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202402-08
- https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20240621-0006/