The Vigil@nce team watches public vulnerabilities impacting your computers, and then offers security solutions, a database and tools to fix them.

Computer vulnerabilities of BouncyCastle

computer vulnerability CVE-2015-7575

Bouncy Castle: MD5 allowed in TLS 1.2

Synthesis of the vulnerability

An attacker can create a collision with a weak algorithm such as MD5 in a TLS 1.2 session of Bouncy Castle, in order to capture data belonging to this session.
Impacted products: Bouncy Castle JCE, openSUSE, openSUSE Leap, SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, SLES, Synology DS***, Synology RS***.
Severity: 1/4.
Consequences: data reading, data creation/edition.
Provenance: internet client.
Creation date: 30/12/2015.
Identifiers: CVE-2015-7575, openSUSE-SU-2016:0605-1, SLOTH, SUSE-SU-2016:0256-1, VIGILANCE-VUL-18615.

Description of the vulnerability

The Bouncy Castle library implements TLS version 1.2.

However, Bouncy Castle does not check if the algorithm used in the DigitallySigned structure is part of the accepted algorithms indicated in the signature_algorithms extension or the CertificateRequest message.

This vulnerability has the same origin than VIGILANCE-VUL-18586.

An attacker can therefore create a collision with a weak algorithm such as MD5 in a TLS 1.2 session of Bouncy Castle, in order to capture data belonging to this session.
Full Vigil@nce bulletin... (Free trial)

computer vulnerability bulletin CVE-2015-2613 CVE-2015-7940

Bouncy Castle, Oracle Java: disclosure of elliptic curve private keys

Synthesis of the vulnerability

An attacker can use a vulnerability in the elliptic curve implementation of Bouncy Castle and Oracle Java, in order to obtain sensitive information.
Impacted products: Bouncy Castle JCE, DCFM Enterprise, FabricOS, Brocade Network Advisor, Brocade vTM, Debian, Fedora, IRAD, WebSphere MQ, Mule ESB, SnapManager, Java OpenJDK, openSUSE, openSUSE Leap, Oracle Communications, Oracle Directory Server, Oracle Directory Services Plus, Oracle Fusion Middleware, Oracle GlassFish Server, Oracle Identity Management, Oracle Internet Directory, Oracle iPlanet Web Server, Java Oracle, JavaFX, Oracle OIT, Tuxedo, Oracle Virtual Directory, WebLogic, Oracle Web Tier, Ubuntu.
Severity: 3/4.
Consequences: data reading.
Provenance: internet client.
Number of vulnerabilities in this bulletin: 2.
Creation date: 22/10/2015.
Identifiers: 1968485, 1972455, 9010041, 9010044, BSA-2016-002, cpuapr2018, cpujan2017, cpujan2018, cpujan2019, cpujul2015, cpujul2017, cpujul2018, cpuoct2017, CVE-2015-2613, CVE-2015-7940, DSA-3417-1, FEDORA-2015-7d95466eda, NTAP-20150715-0001, NTAP-20151028-0001, openSUSE-SU-2015:1911-1, RHSA-2016:2035-01, RHSA-2016:2036-01, USN-3727-1, VIGILANCE-VUL-18168.

Description of the vulnerability

The Bouncy Castle and Oracle Java products implement algorithms based on elliptic curves.

However, if the client forces the server to compute a common secret based on points located outside the chosen curve, he can progressively guess the full server key.

An attacker can therefore use a vulnerability in the elliptic curve implementation of Bouncy Castle and Oracle Java, in order to obtain sensitive information.
Full Vigil@nce bulletin... (Free trial)

computer vulnerability note 16289

Bouncy Castle: vulnerability of CTR DRBG

Synthesis of the vulnerability

An attacker can predict randoms generated by the CTR DRBG of Bouncy Castle.
Impacted products: Bouncy Castle JCE.
Severity: 2/4.
Consequences: data reading.
Provenance: user shell.
Creation date: 02/03/2015.
Identifiers: VIGILANCE-VUL-16289.

Description of the vulnerability

The Bouncy Castle library implements a DRBG (Deterministic Random Bit Generator) using a counter (CTR).

A vulnerability in CTR DRBG of Bouncy Castle was announced.

An attacker can therefore predict randoms generated by the CTR DRBG of Bouncy Castle.
Full Vigil@nce bulletin... (Free trial)

vulnerability 14610

Bouncy Castle: bypassing TLS Server client-auth

Synthesis of the vulnerability

An attacker can offer an invalid client certificate to the DTSL/TLS server of Bouncy Castle, in order to bypass the authentication.
Impacted products: Bouncy Castle JCE.
Severity: 3/4.
Consequences: user access/rights, data reading, data creation/edition.
Provenance: internet client.
Creation date: 17/04/2014.
Identifiers: VIGILANCE-VUL-14610.

Description of the vulnerability

The Bouncy Castle product implements a DTLS/TLS server.

This server can use TlsServer.getCertificateRequest() to require a X.509 certificate from the client. However, if the attacker offers an invalid certificate, this function returns no error.

An attacker can therefore offer an invalid client certificate to the DTSL/TLS server of Bouncy Castle, in order to bypass the authentication.
Full Vigil@nce bulletin... (Free trial)

vulnerability note CVE-2013-0169 CVE-2013-1619 CVE-2013-1620

TLS, DTLS: information disclosure in CBC mode, Lucky 13

Synthesis of the vulnerability

An attacker can inject wrongly encrypted messages in a TLS/DTLS session in mode CBC, and measure the delay before the error message reception, in order to progressively guess the clear content of the session.
Impacted products: Bouncy Castle JCE, Debian, BIG-IP Hardware, TMOS, Fedora, FreeBSD, HP-UX, AIX, DB2 UDB, Tivoli Directory Server, Tivoli Storage Manager, Tivoli Workload Scheduler, WebSphere MQ, Juniper J-Series, Junos OS, Junos Space, NSM Central Manager, NSMXpress, Mandriva Linux, McAfee Email and Web Security, ePO, MySQL Enterprise, NetScreen Firewall, ScreenOS, Java OpenJDK, OpenSSL, openSUSE, openSUSE Leap, Opera, Java Oracle, Solaris, pfSense, SSL protocol, RHEL, JBoss EAP by Red Hat, Slackware, SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, SLES, Unix (platform) ~ not comprehensive, ESX, ESXi, vCenter Server, VMware vSphere, VMware vSphere Hypervisor.
Severity: 1/4.
Consequences: data reading.
Provenance: LAN.
Number of vulnerabilities in this bulletin: 7.
Creation date: 05/02/2013.
Identifiers: 1639354, 1643316, 1672363, BID-57736, BID-57774, BID-57776, BID-57777, BID-57778, BID-57780, BID-57781, c03710522, c03883001, CERTA-2013-AVI-099, CERTA-2013-AVI-109, CERTA-2013-AVI-339, CERTA-2013-AVI-454, CERTA-2013-AVI-543, CERTA-2013-AVI-657, CERTFR-2014-AVI-112, CERTFR-2014-AVI-244, CERTFR-2014-AVI-286, CVE-2013-0169, CVE-2013-1619, CVE-2013-1620, CVE-2013-1621, CVE-2013-1622-REJECT, CVE-2013-1623, CVE-2013-1624, DLA-1518-1, DSA-2621-1, DSA-2622-1, ESX400-201310001, ESX400-201310401-SG, ESX400-201310402-SG, ESX410-201307001, ESX410-201307401-SG, ESX410-201307403-SG, ESX410-201307404-SG, ESX410-201307405-SG, ESX410-201312001, ESX410-201312401-SG, ESX410-201312403-SG, ESXi410-201307001, ESXi410-201307401-SG, ESXi510-201401101-SG, FEDORA-2013-2110, FEDORA-2013-2128, FEDORA-2013-2764, FEDORA-2013-2793, FEDORA-2013-2813, FEDORA-2013-2834, FEDORA-2013-2892, FEDORA-2013-2929, FEDORA-2013-2984, FEDORA-2013-3079, FEDORA-2013-4403, FreeBSD-SA-13:03.openssl, GNUTLS-SA-2013-1, HPSBUX02856, HPSBUX02909, IC90385, IC90395, IC90396, IC90397, IC90660, IC93077, JSA10575, JSA10580, JSA10759, Lucky 13, MDVSA-2013:014, MDVSA-2013:018, MDVSA-2013:019, MDVSA-2013:040, MDVSA-2013:050, MDVSA-2013:052, openSUSE-SU-2013:0336-1, openSUSE-SU-2013:0337-1, openSUSE-SU-2013:0339-1, openSUSE-SU-2013:0807-1, openSUSE-SU-2016:0640-1, RHSA-2013:0273-01, RHSA-2013:0274-01, RHSA-2013:0275-01, RHSA-2013:0531-01, RHSA-2013:0532-01, RHSA-2013:0587-01, RHSA-2013:0588-01, RHSA-2013:0636-01, RHSA-2013:0782-01, RHSA-2013:0783-01, RHSA-2013:0833-01, RHSA-2013:0834-02, RHSA-2013:0839-02, RHSA-2013:1135-01, RHSA-2013:1144-01, RHSA-2013:1181-01, RHSA-2013:1455-01, RHSA-2013:1456-01, RHSA-2014:0371-01, RHSA-2014:0372-01, RHSA-2014:0896-01, RHSA-2015:1009, SOL14190, SOL15630, SSA:2013-040-01, SSA:2013-042-01, SSA:2013-242-01, SSA:2013-242-03, SSA:2013-287-03, SSRT101104, SSRT101289, SUSE-SU-2013:0328-1, SUSE-SU-2014:0320-1, SUSE-SU-2014:0322-1, swg21633669, swg21638270, swg21639354, swg21640169, VIGILANCE-VUL-12374, VMSA-2013-0006.1, VMSA-2013-0007.1, VMSA-2013-0009, VMSA-2013-0009.1, VMSA-2013-0009.2, VMSA-2013-0009.3, VMSA-2013-0015.

Description of the vulnerability

The TLS protocol uses a block encryption algorithm. In CBC (Cipher Block Chaining) mode, the encryption depends on the previous block.

When an incorrect encrypted message is received, a fatal error message is sent to the sender. However, the duration of the generation of this error message depends on the number of valid bytes, used by a MAC hash.

An attacker can therefore inject wrongly encrypted messages in a TLS/DTLS session in mode CBC, and measure the delay before the error message reception, in order to progressively guess the clear content of the session.

In order to guess a clear block, 2^23 TLS sessions are required. So, to exploit this vulnerability, the TLS client has to permanently open a new session, as soon as the previous one ended with a fatal error.
Full Vigil@nce bulletin... (Free trial)

computer vulnerability note 9349

Bouncy Castle JCE: timing attack

Synthesis of the vulnerability

An attacker can measure the computation time of Bouncy Castle JCE, in order to obtain potentially sensitive information.
Impacted products: Bouncy Castle JCE.
Severity: 1/4.
Consequences: data reading.
Provenance: user shell.
Creation date: 14/01/2010.
Identifiers: VIGILANCE-VUL-9349.

Description of the vulnerability

The Bouncy Castle JCE library implements several modes for its encryption algorithms:
 - CCM : Counter with CBC-MAC
 - GCM : Galois Counter Mode
 - etc.

However, the computation time for CCM and GCM mode depends on data to compute.

An attacker can therefore measure the computation time of Bouncy Castle JCE, in order to obtain potentially sensitive information.
Full Vigil@nce bulletin... (Free trial)
Our database contains other pages. You can request a free trial to read them.

Display information about BouncyCastle: