<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Is there a patch planned for OpenSSL Security Advisory [6 Aug 2014]? in Security</title>
    <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Is-there-a-patch-planned-for-OpenSSL-Security-Advisory-6-Aug/m-p/181138#M5389</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Great question! These OpenSSL updates will be part of our next maintenance release. Based on known usages of OpenSSL within Splunk, OpenSSL TLS protocol downgrade attack (CVE-2014-3511) is the main risk.   We are working on the next maintenance releases and will issue updated security advisories.   In the meantime, keep an eye on &lt;A href="http://www.splunk.com/page/securityportal"&gt;Splunk Product Security Portal&lt;/A&gt; for additional updates and announcements.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2014 22:20:52 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>chrisg_splunk</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-08-14T22:20:52Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Is there a patch planned for OpenSSL Security Advisory [6 Aug 2014]?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Is-there-a-patch-planned-for-OpenSSL-Security-Advisory-6-Aug/m-p/181137#M5388</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there a patch planned for Openssl Security Asvisory?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;OpenSSL Security Advisory [6 Aug 2014]&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;Information leak in pretty printing functions (CVE-2014-3508)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;A flaw in OBJ_obj2txt may cause pretty printing functions such as&lt;BR /&gt;
X509_name_oneline, X509_name_print_ex et al. to leak some information from the&lt;BR /&gt;
stack. Applications may be affected if they echo pretty printing output to the&lt;BR /&gt;
attacker. OpenSSL SSL/TLS clients and servers themselves are not affected.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 0.9.8 users should upgrade to 0.9.8zb&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.0 users should upgrade to 1.0.0n.&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.1 users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Ivan Fratric (Google) for discovering this issue. This issue&lt;BR /&gt;
was reported to OpenSSL on 19th June 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Emilia Käsper and Stephen Henson of the OpenSSL&lt;BR /&gt;
development team.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;Crash with SRP ciphersuite in Server Hello message (CVE-2014-5139)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The issue affects OpenSSL clients and allows a malicious server to crash&lt;BR /&gt;
the client with a null pointer dereference (read) by specifying an SRP&lt;BR /&gt;
ciphersuite even though it was not properly negotiated with the client. This can&lt;BR /&gt;
be exploited through a Denial of Service attack.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 1.0.1 SSL/TLS client users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Joonas Kuorilehto and Riku Hietamäki (Codenomicon) for discovering and&lt;BR /&gt;
researching this issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 2nd July 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Stephen Henson of the OpenSSL core team.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;Race condition in ssl_parse_serverhello_tlsext (CVE-2014-3509)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;If a multithreaded client connects to a malicious server using a resumed session&lt;BR /&gt;
and the server sends an ec point format extension it could write up to 255 bytes&lt;BR /&gt;
to freed memory.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 1.0.0 SSL/TLS client users should upgrade to 1.0.0n.&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.1 SSL/TLS client users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Gabor Tyukasz (LogMeIn Inc) for discovering and researching this&lt;BR /&gt;
issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 8th July 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Gabor Tyukasz.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;Double Free when processing DTLS packets (CVE-2014-3505)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;An attacker can force an error condition which causes openssl to crash whilst&lt;BR /&gt;
processing DTLS packets due to memory being freed twice. This can be exploited&lt;BR /&gt;
through a Denial of Service attack.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 0.9.8 DTLS users should upgrade to 0.9.8zb&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.0 DTLS users should upgrade to 1.0.0n.&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.1 DTLS users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Adam Langley and Wan-Teh Chang (Google) for discovering and&lt;BR /&gt;
researching this issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 6th June&lt;BR /&gt;
2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Adam Langley.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;DTLS memory exhaustion (CVE-2014-3506)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;An attacker can force openssl to consume large amounts of memory whilst&lt;BR /&gt;
processing DTLS handshake messages. This can be exploited through a Denial of&lt;BR /&gt;
Service attack.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 0.9.8 DTLS users should upgrade to 0.9.8zb&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.0 DTLS users should upgrade to 1.0.0n.&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.1 DTLS users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Adam Langley (Google) for discovering and researching this&lt;BR /&gt;
issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 6th June 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Adam Langley.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;DTLS memory leak from zero-length fragments (CVE-2014-3507)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;By sending carefully crafted DTLS packets an attacker could cause openssl to&lt;BR /&gt;
leak memory. This can be exploited through a Denial of Service attack.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 0.9.8 DTLS users should upgrade to 0.9.8zb&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.0 DTLS users should upgrade to 1.0.0n.&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.1 DTLS users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Adam Langley (Google) for discovering and researching this&lt;BR /&gt;
issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 6th June 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Adam Langley.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;OpenSSL DTLS anonymous EC(DH) denial of service (CVE-2014-3510)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL DTLS clients enabling anonymous (EC)DH ciphersuites are subject to a&lt;BR /&gt;
denial of service attack. A malicious server can crash the client with a null&lt;BR /&gt;
pointer dereference (read) by specifying an anonymous (EC)DH ciphersuite and&lt;BR /&gt;
sending carefully crafted handshake messages.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 0.9.8 DTLS client users should upgrade to 0.9.8zb&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.0 DTLS client users should upgrade to 1.0.0n.&lt;BR /&gt;
OpenSSL 1.0.1 DTLS client users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Felix Gröbert (Google) for discovering and researching this issue.&lt;BR /&gt;
This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 18th July 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Emilia Käsper of the OpenSSL development team.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;OpenSSL TLS protocol downgrade attack (CVE-2014-3511)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;A flaw in the OpenSSL SSL/TLS server code causes the server to negotiate&lt;BR /&gt;
TLS 1.0 instead of higher protocol versions when the ClientHello message is&lt;BR /&gt;
badly fragmented. This allows a man-in-the-middle attacker to force a&lt;BR /&gt;
downgrade to TLS 1.0 even if both the server and the client support a higher&lt;BR /&gt;
protocol version, by modifying the client's TLS records.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 1.0.1 SSL/TLS server users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to David Benjamin and Adam Langley (Google) for discovering and&lt;BR /&gt;
researching this issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL on 21st July 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by David Benjamin.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;H1&gt;SRP buffer overrun (CVE-2014-3512)&lt;/H1&gt;

&lt;P&gt;A malicious client or server can send invalid SRP parameters and overrun&lt;BR /&gt;
an internal buffer. Only applications which are explicitly set up for SRP&lt;BR /&gt;
use are affected.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;OpenSSL 1.0.1 SSL/TLS users should upgrade to 1.0.1i.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks to Sean Devlin and Watson Ladd (Cryptography Services, NCC&lt;BR /&gt;
Group) for discovering this issue. This issue was reported to OpenSSL&lt;BR /&gt;
on 31st July 2014.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The fix was developed by Stephen Henson of the OpenSSL core team.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:19:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Is-there-a-patch-planned-for-OpenSSL-Security-Advisory-6-Aug/m-p/181137#M5388</guid>
      <dc:creator>khyoung7410</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-28T17:19:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is there a patch planned for OpenSSL Security Advisory [6 Aug 2014]?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Is-there-a-patch-planned-for-OpenSSL-Security-Advisory-6-Aug/m-p/181138#M5389</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Great question! These OpenSSL updates will be part of our next maintenance release. Based on known usages of OpenSSL within Splunk, OpenSSL TLS protocol downgrade attack (CVE-2014-3511) is the main risk.   We are working on the next maintenance releases and will issue updated security advisories.   In the meantime, keep an eye on &lt;A href="http://www.splunk.com/page/securityportal"&gt;Splunk Product Security Portal&lt;/A&gt; for additional updates and announcements.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2014 22:20:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Is-there-a-patch-planned-for-OpenSSL-Security-Advisory-6-Aug/m-p/181138#M5389</guid>
      <dc:creator>chrisg_splunk</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-08-14T22:20:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

