CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2016-0923

Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

Published: Sep 18, 2016 | Modified: Dec 16, 2021
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS 2.x
5 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

The client in EMC RSA BSAFE Micro Edition Suite (MES) 4.0.x before 4.0.9 and 4.1.x before 4.1.5 places the weakest algorithms first in a signature-algorithm list transmitted to a server, which makes it easier for remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms by leveraging server behavior in which the first algorithm is used.

Weakness

The use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm is an unnecessary risk that may result in the exposure of sensitive information.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Bsafe Dell 4.0.0 *
Bsafe Dell 4.1.0 *

Potential Mitigations

  • 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.
  • 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]
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
  • 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.

References