Bug 968027 (CVE-2015-7824) - VUL-0: CVE-2015-7824: Botan: Padding oracle attack on TLS
Summary: VUL-0: CVE-2015-7824: Botan: Padding oracle attack on TLS
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: CVE-2015-7824
Product: SUSE Security Incidents
Classification: Novell Products
Component: Incidents (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other Other
: P3 - Medium : Normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Philipp Thomas
QA Contact: Security Team bot
URL: https://smash.suse.de/issue/162162/
Whiteboard: CVSSv2:RedHat:CVE-2015-7824:4.0:(AV:...
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-02-24 11:35 UTC by Alexander Bergmann
Modified: 2016-04-07 12:53 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Found By: Security Response Team
Services Priority:
Business Priority:
Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: ---
IT Deployment: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Alexander Bergmann 2016-02-24 11:35:19 UTC
http://botan.randombit.net/security.html

2015-10-26 (CVE-2015-7824): Padding oracle attack on TLS

A padding oracle attack was possible against TLS CBC ciphersuites because if a certain length check on the packet fields failed, a different alert type than one used for message authentication failure would be returned to the sender. This check triggering would leak information about the value of the padding bytes and could be used to perform iterative decryption.

As with most such oracle attacks, the danger depends on the underlying protocol - HTTP servers are particularly vulnerable. The current analysis suggests that to exploit it an attacker would first have to guess several bytes of plaintext, but again this is quite possible in many situations including HTTP.

Found in a review by Sirrix AG and 3curity GmbH.

Introduced in 1.11.0, fixed in 1.11.22


References:
http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2015-7824
http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2015/CVE-2015-7824.html
Comment 1 Swamp Workflow Management 2016-02-24 23:03:33 UTC
bugbot adjusting priority
Comment 2 Johannes Segitz 2016-04-07 12:53:58 UTC
Introduced in 1.11.0, we don't have that anywhere