An Improper Authentication vulnerability [CWE-287] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.2, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.11, FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.12, FortiWeb 7.0.0 through 7.0.12 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to login into the Fortiweb GUI/CLI with a random username and password

Summary

Terrapin is a prefix truncation attack targeting the SSH protocol. More precisely, Terrapin breaks the integrity of SSH's secure channel. By carefully adjusting the sequence numbers during the handshake, an attacker can remove an arbitrary amount of messages sent by the client or server at the beginning of the secure channel without the client or server noticing it.

Mitigations

To mitigate this protocol vulnerability, OpenSSH suggested a so-called "strict kex" which alters the SSH handshake to ensure a Man-in-the-Middle attacker cannot introduce unauthenticated messages as well as convey sequence number manipulation across handshakes.

Warning: To take effect, both the client and server must support this countermeasure.

As a stop-gap measure, peers may also (temporarily) disable the affected algorithms and use unaffected alternatives like AES-GCM instead until patches are available.

Details

The SSH specifications of ChaCha20-Poly1305 (chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com) and Encrypt-then-MAC (-etm@openssh.com MACs) are vulnerable against an arbitrary prefix truncation attack (a.k.a. Terrapin attack). This allows for an extension negotiation downgrade by stripping the SSHMSGEXTINFO sent after the first message after SSHMSGNEWKEYS, downgrading security, and disabling attack countermeasures in some versions of OpenSSH. When targeting Encrypt-then-MAC, this attack requires the use of a CBC cipher to be practically exploitable due to the internal workings of the cipher mode. Additionally, this novel attack technique can be used to exploit previously unexploitable implementation flaws in a Man-in-the-Middle scenario.

The attack works by an attacker injecting an arbitrary number of SSHMSGIGNORE messages during the initial key exchange and consequently removing the same number of messages just after the initial key exchange has concluded. This is possible due to missing authentication of the excess SSHMSGIGNORE messages and the fact that the implicit sequence numbers used within the SSH protocol are only checked after the initial key exchange.

In the case of ChaCha20-Poly1305, the attack is guaranteed to work on every connection as this cipher does not maintain an internal state other than the message's sequence number. In the case of Encrypt-Then-MAC, practical exploitation requires the use of a CBC cipher; while theoretical integrity is broken for all ciphers when using this mode, message processing will fail at the application layer for CTR and stream ciphers.

For more details see https://terrapin-attack.com.

Impact

This attack targets the specification of ChaCha20-Poly1305 (chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com) and Encrypt-then-MAC (-etm@openssh.com), which are widely adopted by well-known SSH implementations and can be considered de-facto standard. These algorithms can be practically exploited; however, in the case of Encrypt-Then-MAC, we additionally require the use of a CBC cipher. As a consequence, this attack works against all well-behaving SSH implementations supporting either of those algorithms and can be used to downgrade (but not fully strip) connection security in case SSH extension negotiation (RFC8308) is supported. The attack may also enable attackers to exploit certain implementation flaws in a man-in-the-middle (MitM) scenario.

A security regression (CVE-2006-5051) was discovered in OpenSSH's server (sshd). There is a race condition which can lead sshd to handle some signals in an unsafe manner. An unauthenticated, remote attacker may be able to trigger it by failing to authenticate within a set time period.

A relative path traversal vulnerability [CWE-23] in FortiWeb may allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute administrative commands on the system via crafted HTTP or HTTPS requests. Fortinet has observed this to be exploited in the wild FortiAppSec Cloud is NOT impacted by this vulnerability.

An Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability [CWE-78] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.1, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiWeb 7.0.0 through 7.0.11 may allow an authenticated attacker to execute unauthorized code on the underlying system via crafted HTTP requests or CLI commands.

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an SQL command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability [CWE-89] in FortiWeb may allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute unauthorized SQL code or commands via crafted HTTP or HTTPs requests.

A loop with unreachable exit condition ('infinite loop') in Fortinet FortiOS version 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiOS version 7.0.0 through 7.0.10, FortiOS 6.4 all versions, FortiOS 6.2 all versions, FortiOS 6.0 all versions, FortiProxy version 7.2.0 through 7.2.3, FortiProxy version 7.0.0 through 7.0.9, FortiProxy 2.0 all versions, FortiProxy 1.2 all versions, FortiProxy 1.1 all versions, FortiProxy 1.0 all versions, FortiWeb version 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, FortiWeb version 7.0.0 through 7.0.6, FortiWeb 6.4 all versions, FortiWeb 6.3 all versions allows attacker to perform a denial of service via specially crafted HTTP requests.

A relative path traversal vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.2, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.1 through 7.4.12, FortiWeb 7.2.7 through 7.2.12, FortiWeb 7.0.10 through 7.0.12 may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via <insert attack vector here>

A integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.3, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4 all versions, FortiWeb 7.2 all versions, FortiWeb 7.0 all versions may allow attacker to denial of service via <insert attack vector here>

A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.1, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.11, FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.12, FortiWeb 7.0.0 through 7.0.12 may allow an authenticated attacked to execute arbitrary commands via a specialy crafted HTTP request.

A Stack-based Buffer Overflow vulnerability [CWE-121] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.2, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4 all versions, FortiWeb 7.2 all versions, FortiWeb 7.0.2 through 7.0.12 may allow a remote authenticated attacker who can bypass stack protection and ASLR to execute arbitrary code or commands via crafted HTTP requests.

An Improper Control of Interaction Frequency vulnerability [CWE-799] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.2, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiWeb 7.0.0 through 7.0.11 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to bypass the authentication rate-limit via crafted requests. The success of the attack depends on the attacker's resources and the password target complexity.

A use of externally-controlled format string vulnerability [CWE-134] in FortiOS version 7.4.0 through 7.4.4, version 7.2.0 through 7.2.9, version 7.0.0 through 7.0.15 and before 6.4.15, FortiProxy version 7.4.0 through 7.4.6, version 7.2.0 through 7.2.12 and before 7.0.19, FortiPAM version 1.4.0 through 1.4.2 and before 1.3.1, FortiSRA version 1.4.0 through 1.4.2 and before 1.3.1 and FortiWeb version 7.4.0 through 7.4.5, version 7.2.0 through 7.2.10 and before 7.0.10 allows a privileged attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted HTTP or HTTPS commands.

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability [CWE-78] in Fortinet FortiWeb version 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, 7.4.0 through 7.4.7, 7.2.0 through 7.2.10 and before 7.0.10 allows an authenticated privileged attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via crafted CLI commands

A reliance on cookies without validation and integrity checking vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.1, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiWeb 7.0.0 through 7.0.11 may allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary operations on the system via crafted HTTP or HTTPS request via forged cookies, requiring prior knowledge of the FortiWeb serial number.

A improper handling of parameters in Fortinet FortiWeb versions 7.6.3 and below, versions 7.4.7 and below, versions 7.2.10 and below, and 7.0.10 and below may allow an unauthenticated remote attacker with non-public information pertaining to the device and targeted user to gain admin privileges on the device via a specially crafted request.

A use of password hash instead of password for authentication vulnerability [CWE-836] vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.1, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.5, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiWeb 7.0.0 through 7.0.11 may allow an unauthenticated attacker to use the hash in place of the password to authenticate via crafted HTTP/HTTPS requests

A protection mechanism failure in Fortinet FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.6, 6.4.0 through 6.4.3, 6.3.6 through 6.3.23 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted HTTP requests.

An Incorrect User Management vulnerability [CWE-286] in FortiWeb version 7.6.2 and below, version 7.4.6 and below, version 7.2.10 and below, version 7.0.11 and below widgets dashboard may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only admin permission to perform operations on the dashboard of other administrators via crafted requests.

An Incorrect User Management vulnerability [CWE-286] in FortiWeb widgets dashboard may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only admin permission to perform operations on the dashboard of other administrators via crafted requests.

A use of externally-controlled format string vulnerability [CWE-134] in FortiOS, FortiProxy, FortiPAM, FortiSRA and FortiWeb may allow a privileged attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted HTTP or HTTPS commands.

An exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor vulnerability [CWE-200] in FortiWeb version 7.4.0, version 7.2.4 and below, version 7.0.8 and below, 6.3 all versions may allow an authenticated attacker to read password hashes of other administrators via CLI commands.

Multiple improper authorization vulnerabilities [CWE-285] in FortiWeb version 7.4.2 and below, version 7.2.7 and below, version 7.0.10 and below, version 6.4.3 and below, version 6.3.23 and below may allow an authenticated attacker to perform unauthorized ADOM operations via crafted requests.

CVE-2024-6387 A signal handler race condition was found in OpenSSH's server (sshd), where a client does not authenticate within LoginGraceTime seconds (120 by default, 600 in old OpenSSH versions), then sshd's SIGALRM handler is called asynchronously. However, this signal handler calls various functions that are not async-signal-safe, for example, syslog(). This could lead to remote code execution with root privileges.

An improper output neutralization for logs in Fortinet FortiWeb 6.2.0 - 6.2.8, 6.3.0 - 6.3.23, 7.0.0 - 7.0.9, 7.2.0 - 7.2.5 and 7.4.0 may allow an attacker to forge traffic logs via a crafted URL of the web application.

CVE-2023-48795The SSH transport protocol with certain OpenSSH extensions, found in OpenSSH before 9.6 and other products, allows remote attackers to bypass integrity checks such that some packets are omitted (from the extension negotiation message), and a client and server may consequently end up with a connection for which some security features have been downgraded or disabled, aka a Terrapin attack. This occurs because the SSH Binary Packet Protocol (BPP), implemented by these extensions, mishandles the handshake phase and mishandles use of sequence numbers. For example, there is an effective attack against SSH's use of ChaCha20-Poly1305 (and CBC with Encrypt-then-MAC). The bypass occurs in chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com and (if CBC is used) the -etm@openssh.com MAC algorithms.