CVEdetails.com the ultimate security vulnerability data source
(e.g.: CVE-2009-1234 or 2010-1234 or 20101234)
Log In   Register
Vulnerability Feeds & WidgetsNew   www.itsecdb.com  

Ietf : Security Vulnerabilities

Press ESC to close
# CVE ID CWE ID # of Exploits Vulnerability Type(s) Publish Date Update Date Score Gained Access Level Access Complexity Authentication Conf. Integ. Avail.
1 CVE-2016-10142 17 2017-01-14 2017-07-10
5.0
None Remote Low Not required None None Partial
An issue was discovered in the IPv6 protocol specification, related to ICMP Packet Too Big (PTB) messages. (The scope of this CVE is all affected IPv6 implementations from all vendors.) The security implications of IP fragmentation have been discussed at length in [RFC6274] and [RFC7739]. An attacker can leverage the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments to trigger the use of fragmentation in an arbitrary IPv6 flow (in scenarios in which actual fragmentation of packets is not needed) and can subsequently perform any type of fragmentation-based attack against legacy IPv6 nodes that do not implement [RFC6946]. That is, employing fragmentation where not actually needed allows for fragmentation-based attack vectors to be employed, unnecessarily. We note that, unfortunately, even nodes that already implement [RFC6946] can be subject to DoS attacks as a result of the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments. Let us assume that Host A is communicating with Host B and that, as a result of the widespread dropping of IPv6 packets that contain extension headers (including fragmentation) [RFC7872], some intermediate node filters fragments between Host B and Host A. If an attacker sends a forged ICMPv6 PTB error message to Host B, reporting an MTU smaller than 1280, this will trigger the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments from that moment on (as required by [RFC2460]). When Host B starts sending IPv6 atomic fragments (in response to the received ICMPv6 PTB error message), these packets will be dropped, since we previously noted that IPv6 packets with extension headers were being dropped between Host B and Host A. Thus, this situation will result in a DoS scenario. Another possible scenario is that in which two BGP peers are employing IPv6 transport and they implement Access Control Lists (ACLs) to drop IPv6 fragments (to avoid control-plane attacks). If the aforementioned BGP peers drop IPv6 fragments but still honor received ICMPv6 PTB error messages, an attacker could easily attack the corresponding peering session by simply sending an ICMPv6 PTB message with a reported MTU smaller than 1280 bytes. Once the attack packet has been sent, the aforementioned routers will themselves be the ones dropping their own traffic.
2 CVE-2007-2242 DoS 2007-04-25 2017-10-10
7.8
None Remote Low Not required None None Complete
The IPv6 protocol allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via crafted IPv6 type 0 route headers (IPV6_RTHDR_TYPE_0) that create network amplification between two routers.
3 CVE-2004-2761 310 2009-01-05 2017-02-01
5.0
None Remote Low Not required None Partial None
The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm is not collision resistant, which makes it easier for context-dependent attackers to conduct spoofing attacks, as demonstrated by attacks on the use of MD5 in the signature algorithm of an X.509 certificate.
Total number of vulnerabilities : 3   Page : 1 (This Page)
CVE is a registred trademark of the MITRE Corporation and the authoritative source of CVE content is MITRE's CVE web site. CWE is a registred trademark of the MITRE Corporation and the authoritative source of CWE content is MITRE's CWE web site. OVAL is a registered trademark of The MITRE Corporation and the authoritative source of OVAL content is MITRE's OVAL web site.
Use of this information constitutes acceptance for use in an AS IS condition. There are NO warranties, implied or otherwise, with regard to this information or its use. Any use of this information is at the user's risk. It is the responsibility of user to evaluate the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, opinion, advice or other content. EACH USER WILL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY consequences of his or her direct or indirect use of this web site. ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND ARE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMED. This site will NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT or any other kind of loss.