71–80 of 88 posts
Is this something I have to worry about as someone who uses AWS ELB SSL offloading? Hard to tell from the docs.
Yes. https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=149690
If one were using ASLR would this have mostly mitigated this? (I just rebuilt without the heartbeat extension but I'm curious). Also how exploitable is this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=149690
Note that until it gets patched, you can go to your ELB config and disable TLS support, which I believe (someone please correct me if not) will protect you from this particular attack. Whether the cure is better than the disease is up to you.
Are Android or iOS affected? Android seems to ship openssl 1.0. Could a malicious server attack clients? Perhaps expose a browser's cookie jar or other saved passwords in memory? The number of installed openssl clients across all devices and computers must be quite large.
Yes, the vulnerable code is used by both client and server so any client using openssl is affected.
The browsers? All Apps running on Dalvik? All apps running on ART?
"Don't roll your own parsers" should really be up there with "Don't roll your own crypto". This advisory is scant on details, but this extension protocol[0] neither looks complex nor beyond mechanical code generation to me. Just simple enough to be dangerous. And it's pretty new, so this must be recently authored vulnerable code. [0] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-dtls-heartbeat-04
2011-12-31, it looks like, so it's been there for a couple of years already (introduced between 1.0.0f and 1.0.1): http://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's the commit for the fix: http://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=...
Ouch, pretty basic lack of bounds checking. Even though the code got better with this fix I still wouldn't accept code that looks like this in a review. Why are 1, 2, 3, 16 not defines? What's up with the code duplication between files? Where are the unit-tests? I'm starting to feel that a lot of software that has been around for 10+ years and is commonly used does not live up to current best practices regarding writ…
I get the impression that this applies to openssl far more than other software. The code base is a mess, and it's security sensitive. So people dare not touch it.
It's a shame that there isn't a better incentive for this particular code base to be fixed.
"Don't roll your own parsers" should really be up there with "Don't roll your own crypto". This advisory is scant on details, but this extension protocol[0] neither looks complex nor beyond mechanical code generation to me. Just simple enough to be dangerous. And it's pretty new, so this must be recently authored vulnerable code. [0] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-dtls-heartbeat-04
Here's the commit for the fix: http://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=...
if (1 + 2 + 16 > s->s3->rrec.length)
if (1 + 2 + payload + 16 > s->s3->rrec.length)
This always makes me cringe during code reviews.
How does one go about installing this update on Ubuntu? "sudo apt-get upgrade openssl" didn't do it.
The binary package name is "libssl1.0.0". You want "sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install libssl1.0.0", but I suggest that you take all security and regular updates (or set sources.list to security only updates if you insist). Then you can just run "sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade" to pick up all updates, without worrying about package names.
If you want to verify if a particular vulnerability is fixed, look in /usr/share/doc//changelog.Debian.gz. In this case, you want /usr/share/doc/libssl1.0.0/changelog.Debian.gz. In this file, you'll see CVE-2014-0160 mentioned as fixed, which is the universal identifier of this vulnerability.
Are Android or iOS affected? Android seems to ship openssl 1.0. Could a malicious server attack clients? Perhaps expose a browser's cookie jar or other saved passwords in memory? The number of installed openssl clients across all devices and computers must be quite large.