CWE-295

A vulnerability was found in keycloak before 6.0.2. The X.509 authenticator supports the verification of client certificates through the CRL, where the CRL list can be obtained from the URL provided in the certificate itself (CDP) or through the separately configured path. The CRL are often available over the network through unsecured protocols (‘http’ or ‘ldap’) and hence the caller should verify the signature and possibly the certification path. Keycloak currently doesn’t validate signatures on CRL, which can result in a possibility of various attacks like man-in-the-middle.

An issue has been found in PowerDNS Recursor versions 4.1.x before 4.1.9 where records in the answer section of responses received from authoritative servers with the AA flag not set were not properly validated, allowing an attacker to bypass DNSSEC validation.

It was discovered that Dovecot before versions 2.2.36.1 and 2.3.4.1 incorrectly handled client certificates. A remote attacker in possession of a valid certificate with an empty username field could possibly use this issue to impersonate other users.

Dell EMC Enterprise Copy Data Management (eCDM) versions 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 2.1, and 3.0 contain a certificate validation vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker may potentially exploit this vulnerability to carry out a man-in-the-middle attack by supplying a crafted certificate and intercepting the victim’s traffic to view or modify a victim’s data in transit.

Data Protection Central versions 1.0, 1.0.1, 18.1, 18.2, and 19.1 contains an Improper Certificate Chain of Trust Vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability by obtaining a CA signed certificate from Data Protection Central to impersonate a valid system to compromise the integrity of data.

Pivotal Application Service (PAS), versions 2.2.x prior to 2.2.12, 2.3.x prior to 2.3.7 and 2.4.x prior to 2.4.3, contain apps manager that uses a cloud controller proxy that fails to verify SSL certs. A remote unauthenticated attacker that could hijack the Cloud Controller’s DNS record could intercept access tokens sent to the Cloud Controller, giving the attacker access to the user’s resources in the Cloud Controller