CWE-327
Allowed-with-ReviewUse of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
963 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-H929-FVVP-882C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-20 15:30 – Updated: 2026-02-04 23:11Duplicate Advisory
This advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of GHSA-wc42-fcjp-v8vq. This link is maintained to preserve external references.
Original Description
Vault Key Sealed With SHA1 PCRs
The measured boot solution implemented in EVE OS leans on a PCR locking mechanism.
Different parts of the system update different PCR values in the TPM, resulting in a unique value for each PCR entry.
These PCRs are then used in order to seal/unseal a key from the TPM which is used to encrypt/decrypt the “vault” directory.
This “vault” directory is the most sensitive point in the system and as such, its content should be protected.
This mechanism is noted in Zededa’s documentation as the “measured boot” mechanism, designed to protect said “vault”.
The code that’s responsible for generating and fetching the key from the TPM assumes that SHA256 PCRs are used in order to seal/unseal the key, and as such their presence is being checked.
The issue here is that the key is not sealed using SHA256 PCRs, but using SHA1 PCRs. This leads to several issues:
• Machines that have their SHA256 PCRs enabled but SHA1 PCRs disabled, as well as not sealing their keys at all, meaning the “vault” is not protected from an attacker.
• SHA1 is considered insecure and reduces the complexity level required to unseal the key in machines which have their SHA1 PCRs enabled.
An attacker can very easily retrieve the contents of the “vault”, which will effectively render the “measured boot” mechanism meaningless.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/lf-edge/eve"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20230519072751-977f42b07fa9"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327",
"CWE-328"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-04T23:11:53Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-09-20T15:15:11Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Duplicate Advisory\nThis advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of GHSA-wc42-fcjp-v8vq. This link is maintained to preserve external references.\n\n### Original Description\nVault Key Sealed With SHA1 PCRs\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe measured boot solution implemented in EVE OS leans on a PCR locking mechanism.\n\nDifferent parts of the system update different PCR values in the TPM, resulting in a unique\nvalue for each PCR entry.\n\nThese PCRs are then used in order to seal/unseal a key from the TPM which is used to\nencrypt/decrypt the \u201cvault\u201d directory.\n\nThis \u201cvault\u201d directory is the most sensitive point in the system and as such, its content should\nbe protected.\n\nThis mechanism is noted in Zededa\u2019s documentation as the \u201cmeasured boot\u201d mechanism,\ndesigned to protect said \u201cvault\u201d.\n\nThe code that\u2019s responsible for generating and fetching the key from the TPM assumes that\nSHA256 PCRs are used in order to seal/unseal the key, and as such their presence is being\nchecked.\n\nThe issue here is that the key is not sealed using SHA256 PCRs, but using SHA1 PCRs.\nThis leads to several issues:\n\n\u2022 Machines that have their SHA256 PCRs enabled but SHA1 PCRs disabled, as well\nas not sealing their keys at all, meaning the \u201cvault\u201d is not protected from an attacker.\n\n\u2022 SHA1 is considered insecure and reduces the complexity level required to unseal the\nkey in machines which have their SHA1 PCRs enabled.\n\n\n\nAn attacker can very easily retrieve the contents of the \u201cvault\u201d, which will effectively render\nthe \u201cmeasured boot\u201d mechanism meaningless.",
"id": "GHSA-h929-fvvp-882c",
"modified": "2026-02-04T23:11:53Z",
"published": "2023-09-20T15:30:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-43635"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://asrg.io/security-advisories/cve-2023-43635"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://asrg.io/security-advisories/vault-key-sealed-with-sha1-pcrs"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Duplicate Advisory: EVE Seals Vault Key With SHA1 PCRs",
"withdrawn": "2026-02-04T23:11:53Z"
}
GHSA-H994-94FP-9GVP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:20 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:20A CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm vulnerability exists in Easergy T300 (Firmware version 1.5.2 and older) which could allow an attacker to acquire a password by brute force.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-7511"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-06-16T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm vulnerability exists in Easergy T300 (Firmware version 1.5.2 and older) which could allow an attacker to acquire a password by brute force.",
"id": "GHSA-h994-94fp-9gvp",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:20:40Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:20:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-7511"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.se.com/ww/en/download/document/SEVD-2020-161-04"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-H9JC-6JHQ-R45Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:53 – Updated: 2023-05-16 12:30An issue was discovered in 3S-Smart CODESYS V3 products. The application may utilize non-TLS based encryption, which results in user credentials being insufficiently protected during transport. All variants of the following CODESYS V3 products in all versions containing the CmpUserMgr component are affected regardless of the CPU type or operating system: CODESYS Control for BeagleBone, CODESYS Control for emPC-A/iMX6, CODESYS Control for IOT2000, CODESYS Control for Linux, CODESYS Control for PFC100, CODESYS Control for PFC200, CODESYS Control for Raspberry Pi, CODESYS Control RTE V3, CODESYS Control RTE V3 (for Beckhoff CX), CODESYS Control Win V3 (also part of the CODESYS Development System setup), CODESYS V3 Simulation Runtime (part of the CODESYS Development System), CODESYS Control V3 Runtime System Toolkit, CODESYS HMI V3.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-9013"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-08-15T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in 3S-Smart CODESYS V3 products. The application may utilize non-TLS based encryption, which results in user credentials being insufficiently protected during transport. All variants of the following CODESYS V3 products in all versions containing the CmpUserMgr component are affected regardless of the CPU type or operating system: CODESYS Control for BeagleBone, CODESYS Control for emPC-A/iMX6, CODESYS Control for IOT2000, CODESYS Control for Linux, CODESYS Control for PFC100, CODESYS Control for PFC200, CODESYS Control for Raspberry Pi, CODESYS Control RTE V3, CODESYS Control RTE V3 (for Beckhoff CX), CODESYS Control Win V3 (also part of the CODESYS Development System setup), CODESYS V3 Simulation Runtime (part of the CODESYS Development System), CODESYS Control V3 Runtime System Toolkit, CODESYS HMI V3.",
"id": "GHSA-h9jc-6jhq-r45q",
"modified": "2023-05-16T12:30:19Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:53:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-9013"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://customers.codesys.com/index.php?eID=dumpFile\u0026t=f\u0026f=12943\u0026token=d097958a67ba382de688916f77e3013c0802fade\u0026download="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.us-cert.gov/ics/advisories/icsa-19-213-04"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-H9P7-8GVP-9RMP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-01-11 00:01 – Updated: 2022-01-14 00:02IBM Security Verify 10.0.0, 10.0.1.0, and 10.0.2.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 210067.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-38921"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-01-10T14:10:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "IBM Security Verify 10.0.0, 10.0.1.0, and 10.0.2.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 210067.",
"id": "GHSA-h9p7-8gvp-9rmp",
"modified": "2022-01-14T00:02:58Z",
"published": "2022-01-11T00:01:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-38921"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/210067"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6538418"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-HCGC-HFP6-58V4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-25 21:31 – Updated: 2026-06-26 18:33ML-KEM-1024 x64 AVX2 implicit rejection failure in the Fujisaki-Okamoto transform breaks IND-CCA2 security, allowing decapsulation to deviate from the implicit-rejection behavior required by the standard. The AVX2 constant-time ciphertext comparison used during decapsulation never compared the final 32-byte block of the 1568-byte ML-KEM-1024 ciphertext, so a ciphertext manipulated only in those final bytes would compare as equal and decapsulation returned the real shared secret instead of performing the required implicit rejection.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-10097"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327",
"CWE-697"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-25T20:17:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "ML-KEM-1024 x64 AVX2 implicit rejection failure in the Fujisaki-Okamoto transform breaks IND-CCA2 security, allowing decapsulation to deviate from the implicit-rejection behavior required by the standard. The AVX2 constant-time ciphertext comparison used during decapsulation never compared the final 32-byte block of the 1568-byte ML-KEM-1024 ciphertext, so a ciphertext manipulated only in those final bytes would compare as equal and decapsulation returned the real shared secret instead of performing the required implicit rejection.",
"id": "GHSA-hcgc-hfp6-58v4",
"modified": "2026-06-26T18:33:50Z",
"published": "2026-06-25T21:31:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-10097"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/10430"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wolfssl.com/docs/security-vulnerabilities"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-HCRG-QR57-HR37
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-22 15:34 – Updated: 2025-06-04 21:31Missing Cryptographic Step vulnerability in Tridium Niagara Framework on Windows, Linux, QNX, Tridium Niagara Enterprise Security on Windows, Linux, QNX allows Cryptanalysis. This issue affects Niagara Framework: before 4.14.2, before 4.15.1, before 4.10.11; Niagara Enterprise Security: before 4.14.2, before 4.15.1, before 4.10.11. Tridium recommends upgrading to Niagara Framework and Enterprise Security versions 4.14.2u2, 4.15.u1, or 4.10u.11.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-3938"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-325",
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-22T13:15:56Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Cryptographic Step vulnerability in Tridium Niagara Framework on Windows, Linux, QNX, Tridium Niagara Enterprise Security on Windows, Linux, QNX allows Cryptanalysis. This issue affects Niagara Framework: before 4.14.2, before 4.15.1, before 4.10.11; Niagara Enterprise Security: before 4.14.2, before 4.15.1, before 4.10.11.\u00a0Tridium recommends upgrading to Niagara Framework and Enterprise Security versions 4.14.2u2, 4.15.u1, or 4.10u.11.",
"id": "GHSA-hcrg-qr57-hr37",
"modified": "2025-06-04T21:31:09Z",
"published": "2025-05-22T15:34:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-3938"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.niagara-community.com/category/tech_bull"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.honeywell.com/us/en/product-security#security-notices"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HCWQ-WCMG-W44R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-03 12:34 – Updated: 2025-07-03 12:34The VNC authentication mechanism bases on a challenge-response system where both server and client use the same password for encryption. The challenge is sent from the server to the client, is encrypted by the client and sent back. The server does the same encryption locally and if the responses match it is prooven that the client knows the correct password. Since all VNC communication is unencrypted, an attacker can obtain the challenge and response and try to derive the password from this information.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-27458"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-03T12:15:23Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The VNC authentication mechanism bases on a challenge-response system where both server and client use the same password for encryption. The challenge is sent from the server to the client, is encrypted by the client and sent back. The server does the same encryption locally and if the responses match it is prooven that the client knows the correct password. Since all VNC communication is unencrypted, an attacker can obtain the challenge and response and try to derive the password from this information.",
"id": "GHSA-hcwq-wcmg-w44r",
"modified": "2025-07-03T12:34:58Z",
"published": "2025-07-03T12:34:58Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-27458"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://sick.com/psirt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/resources/ics-recommended-practices"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.endress.com"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/3.1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.sick.com/.well-known/csaf/white/2025/sca-2025-0008.json"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.sick.com/.well-known/csaf/white/2025/sca-2025-0008.pdf"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HG7J-9H3G-36X3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-07-19 00:00 – Updated: 2022-07-27 00:00Rocket-Chip commit 4f8114374d8824dfdec03f576a8cd68bebce4e56 was discovered to contain insufficient cryptography via the component /rocket/RocketCore.scala.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-34632"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-07-18T23:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Rocket-Chip commit 4f8114374d8824dfdec03f576a8cd68bebce4e56 was discovered to contain insufficient cryptography via the component /rocket/RocketCore.scala.",
"id": "GHSA-hg7j-9h3g-36x3",
"modified": "2022-07-27T00:00:34Z",
"published": "2022-07-19T00:00:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-34632"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/chipsalliance/rocket-chip/pull/2950#issuecomment-1106745660"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/chipsalliance/rocket-chip/pull/2950#issuecomment-1107055607"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/chipsalliance/rocket-chip/pull/2950/commits/4f8114374d8824dfdec03f576a8cd68bebce4e56"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HGJ3-CGGC-7JC2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-15 00:30 – Updated: 2025-11-15 00:30The vulnerability, if exploited, could allow a miscreant with read access to Edge Project files or Edge Offline Cache files to reverse engineer Edge users' app-native or Active Directory passwords through computational brute-forcing of weak hashes.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-9317"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-15T00:15:48Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The vulnerability, if exploited, could allow a miscreant with read \naccess to Edge Project files or Edge Offline Cache files to reverse \nengineer Edge users\u0027 app-native or Active Directory passwords through \ncomputational brute-forcing of weak hashes.",
"id": "GHSA-hgj3-cggc-7jc2",
"modified": "2025-11-15T00:30:27Z",
"published": "2025-11-15T00:30:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-9317"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/cisagov/CSAF/blob/develop/csaf_files/OT/white/2025/icsa-25-317-03.json"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.aveva.com/content/dam/aveva/documents/support/cyber-security-updates/SecurityBulletin_AVEVA-2025-006.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-25-317-03"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-HH46-3H2M-RHW6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-26 21:30 – Updated: 2023-02-01 21:30IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5 and 9.0 traditional container uses weaker than expected cryptographic keys that could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information. This affects only the containerized version of WebSphere Application Server traditional. IBM X-Force ID: 241045.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-43917"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-327"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-26T21:17:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5 and 9.0 traditional container uses weaker than expected cryptographic keys that could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information. This affects only the containerized version of WebSphere Application Server traditional. IBM X-Force ID: 241045.",
"id": "GHSA-hh46-3h2m-rhw6",
"modified": "2023-02-01T21:30:22Z",
"published": "2023-01-26T21:30:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-43917"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/241045"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6857007"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-24
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis.
- For example, US government systems require FIPS 140-2 certification [REF-1192].
- Do not develop custom or private cryptographic algorithms. They will likely be exposed to attacks that are well-understood by cryptographers. Reverse engineering techniques are mature. If the algorithm can be compromised if attackers find out how it works, then it is especially weak.
- Periodically ensure that the cryptography has not become obsolete. Some older algorithms, once thought to require a billion years of computing time, can now be broken in days or hours. This includes MD4, MD5, SHA1, DES, and other algorithms that were once regarded as strong. [REF-267]
Mitigation MIT-52
Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms. With hardware, design the product at the Intellectual Property (IP) level so that one cryptographic algorithm can be replaced with another in the next generation of the hardware product.
Mitigation
Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
Mitigation MIT-4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- Industry-standard implementations will save development time and may be more likely to avoid errors that can occur during implementation of cryptographic algorithms. Consider the ESAPI Encryption feature.
Mitigation MIT-25
When using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.
CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing
An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.
CAPEC-459: Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate
An adversary exploits a weakness resulting from using a hashing algorithm with weak collision resistance to generate certificate signing requests (CSR) that contain collision blocks in their "to be signed" parts. The adversary submits one CSR to be signed by a trusted certificate authority then uses the signed blob to make a second certificate appear signed by said certificate authority. Due to the hash collision, both certificates, though different, hash to the same value and so the signed blob works just as well in the second certificate. The net effect is that the adversary's second X.509 certificate, which the Certification Authority has never seen, is now signed and validated by that Certification Authority.
CAPEC-473: Signature Spoof
An attacker generates a message or datablock that causes the recipient to believe that the message or datablock was generated and cryptographically signed by an authoritative or reputable source, misleading a victim or victim operating system into performing malicious actions.
CAPEC-475: Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation
An adversary exploits a cryptographic weakness in the signature verification algorithm implementation to generate a valid signature without knowing the key.
CAPEC-608: Cryptanalysis of Cellular Encryption
The use of cryptanalytic techniques to derive cryptographic keys or otherwise effectively defeat cellular encryption to reveal traffic content. Some cellular encryption algorithms such as A5/1 and A5/2 (specified for GSM use) are known to be vulnerable to such attacks and commercial tools are available to execute these attacks and decrypt mobile phone conversations in real-time. Newer encryption algorithms in use by UMTS and LTE are stronger and currently believed to be less vulnerable to these types of attacks. Note, however, that an attacker with a Cellular Rogue Base Station can force the use of weak cellular encryption even by newer mobile devices.
CAPEC-614: Rooting SIM Cards
SIM cards are the de facto trust anchor of mobile devices worldwide. The cards protect the mobile identity of subscribers, associate devices with phone numbers, and increasingly store payment credentials, for example in NFC-enabled phones with mobile wallets. This attack leverages over-the-air (OTA) updates deployed via cryptographically-secured SMS messages to deliver executable code to the SIM. By cracking the DES key, an attacker can send properly signed binary SMS messages to a device, which are treated as Java applets and are executed on the SIM. These applets are allowed to send SMS, change voicemail numbers, and query the phone location, among many other predefined functions. These capabilities alone provide plenty of potential for abuse.
CAPEC-97: Cryptanalysis
Cryptanalysis is a process of finding weaknesses in cryptographic algorithms and using these weaknesses to decipher the ciphertext without knowing the secret key (instance deduction). Sometimes the weakness is not in the cryptographic algorithm itself, but rather in how it is applied that makes cryptanalysis successful. An attacker may have other goals as well, such as: Total Break (finding the secret key), Global Deduction (finding a functionally equivalent algorithm for encryption and decryption that does not require knowledge of the secret key), Information Deduction (gaining some information about plaintexts or ciphertexts that was not previously known) and Distinguishing Algorithm (the attacker has the ability to distinguish the output of the encryption (ciphertext) from a random permutation of bits).