[logback-user] Ambiguous vulnerability assessment help
Angelo Rauseo
angelo.rauseo at workday.com
Fri Sep 10 19:10:14 CEST 2021
Update:
Some more data has emerged, and after inquiring with JFrog, they pointed me to the issue being connected to what is under work in https://jira.qos.ch/browse/LOGBACK-1574 and https://github.com/qos-ch/logback/pull/305.
It seems the root of the concern is the hostname validation.
Angelo
From: Angelo Rauseo <angelo.rauseo at workday.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 at 09:00
To: logback users list <logback-user at qos.ch>
Subject: Re: [External Sender] Re: [logback-user] Ambiguous vulnerability assessment help
Ciao David,
Thank you for your reply and the recommendations. I am trying to reach out to JFrog and to see what data they have, and I think it is reasonable to not use logback apis to reach out to servers via TLS/SSL to stay safe.
Even with all the precautions, I am still a bit confused by the lack of details and somewhat concerned about finding the root cause of a MiTM issue.
Is there anyone here with experience of TLS connectivity in logback? Which would be the APIs involved?
Thanks for your time,
Angelo
From: logback-user <logback-user-bounces at qos.ch> on behalf of David Roussel <nabble at diroussel.xsmail.com>
Reply-To: logback users list <logback-user at qos.ch>
Date: Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 02:10
To: logback users list <logback-user at qos.ch>
Subject: [External Sender] Re: [logback-user] Ambiguous vulnerability assessment help
Ciao Angelo,
To reproduce this might take quite a bit of work, as the report you copied doesn’t provide details of how the MITM cert was spoofed. It might be as simple as not validating the cert at all. But if you have support from JFrog, then I would be best to contact them for more details.
I don’t currently use logback myself, but when I did I never relied on any feature that connected out to TLS endpoints. If you don’t either, then you can ignore this issue.
If your logback usage does include connecting out to TLS endpoints, then in each case you need to consider how confidential is that data, what could the impact of a MITM be, and what control do you have over the cert validation.
The problem is that there are many ways in which TLS connections can be made, even just parsing an XML document can cause network requests.
David
On 27 Aug 2021, at 17:31, Angelo Rauseo <angelo.rauseo at workday.com<mailto:angelo.rauseo at workday.com>> wrote:
Hello everyone,
I am looking for details about a vulnerability listed in JFrog X-Ray (see below) that does not have much data attached to it in the report (no CVE, no links to analysis). My end goal would be to eventually help resolve it, but I have no data about the source to start from.
Anyone here that can help me assess it?
Thank you for your time and assistance!
Angelo
┌─────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Summary │ logback SSL Certificate Validation Failure MitM Spoofing │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Severity │ MEDIUM │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Description │ logback contains a flaw as X.509 certificates are not properly validated. By spoofing the TLS/SSL │
│ │ server via a certificate that appears valid, an attacker with the ability to intercept network │
│ │ traffic (e.g. MitM, DNS cache poisoning) can disclose and optionally manipulate transmitted data. │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Type │ SECURITY │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Provider │ JFrog │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Issues │ 4.0/CVSS:2.0/AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Edited │ 2021-04-15T09:22:04Z │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Created │ 2019-05-02T00:00:00.297Z │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Impact paths │ - │
│ │ /sha256__11533f8a115abc3bbf6840bebe91a8616a0ee04cd4bdad4094ed62e6f86d4432.tar.gz/usr/share/fugu/li │
│ │ b/ch.qos.logback-logback-core-1.2.3.jar │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │ Affected component ID: gav://ch.qos.logback:logback-core:1.2.3 │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Vulnerable versions │ 1.0.12 ≤ Version ≤ 1.3.0-alpha5 │
├─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Fixed versions │ │
└─────────────────────┴────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
_______________________________________________
logback-user mailing list
logback-user at qos.ch<mailto:logback-user at qos.ch>
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mailman.qos.ch_mailman_listinfo_logback-2Duser&d=DwMFaQ&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=QDRlV20Ri1l0kzdezi8EjKLiEjyGGL8ZdxIoltJLy7w&m=JqVy4JZWTjrqpf01CGLjtKp98ub0RSqr9FTer4EqbhU&s=FAuAnoQCWjXeiTNsJTd_yO73o5kYhBOcw7ak8oj9brI&e=>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qos.ch/pipermail/logback-user/attachments/20210910/3ca7b919/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the logback-user
mailing list