Due to the use of an insecure RFID technology (MIFARE Classic), ABUS proximity chip keys (RFID tokens) of the ABUS Secvest FUAA50000 wireless alarm system can easily be cloned and used to deactivate the alarm system in an unauthorized way.
CWE-310
CVE-2019-9191
The ETSI Enterprise Transport Security (ETS, formerly known as eTLS) protocol does not provide per-session forward secrecy.
CVE-2019-6576
A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC HMI Comfort Panels 4″ – 22″ (All versions < V15.1 Update 1), SIMATIC HMI Comfort Outdoor Panels 7" & 15" (All versions < V15.1 Update 1), SIMATIC HMI KTP Mobile Panels KTP400F, KTP700, KTP700F, KTP900 und KTP900F (All versions < V15.1 Update 1), SIMATIC WinCC Runtime Advanced (All versions < V15.1 Update 1), SIMATIC WinCC Runtime Professional (All versions < V15.1 Update 1), SIMATIC WinCC (TIA Portal) (All versions < V15.1 Update 1), SIMATIC HMI Classic Devices (TP/MP/OP/MP Mobile Panel) (All versions). An attacker with network access to affected devices could potentially obtain a TLS session key. If the attacker is able to observe TLS traffic between a legitimate user and the device, then the attacker could decrypt the TLS traffic. The security vulnerability could be exploited by an attacker who has network access to the web interface of the device and who is able to observe TLS traffic between legitimate users and the web interface of the affected device. The vulnerability could impact the confidentiality of the communication between the affected device and a legitimate user. At the time of advisory publication no public exploitation of the security vulnerability was known.
CVE-2019-3739
RSA BSAFE Crypto-J versions prior to 6.2.5 are vulnerable to Information Exposure Through Timing Discrepancy vulnerabilities during ECDSA key generation. A malicious remote attacker could potentially exploit those vulnerabilities to recover ECDSA keys.
CVE-2019-14261
An issue was discovered on ABUS Secvest FUAA50000 3.01.01 devices. Due to an insufficient implementation of jamming detection, an attacker is able to suppress correctly received RF messages sent between wireless peripheral components, e.g., wireless detectors or remote controls, and the ABUS Secvest alarm central. An attacker is able to perform a “reactive jamming” attack. The reactive jamming simply detects the start of a RF message sent by a component of the ABUS Secvest wireless alarm system, for instance a wireless motion detector (FUBW50000) or a remote control (FUBE50014 or FUBE50015), and overlays it with random data before the original RF message ends. Thereby, the receiver (alarm central) is not able to properly decode the original transmitted signal. This enables an attacker to suppress correctly received RF messages of the wireless alarm system in an unauthorized manner, for instance status messages sent by a detector indicating an intrusion.