Lines 57-62
Link Here
|
57 |
|
57 |
|
58 |
--> |
58 |
--> |
59 |
<vuxml xmlns="http://www.vuxml.org/apps/vuxml-1"> |
59 |
<vuxml xmlns="http://www.vuxml.org/apps/vuxml-1"> |
|
|
60 |
<vuln vid="150d1538-23fa-11e5-a4a5-002590263bf5"> |
61 |
<topic>squid -- multiple vulnerabilities</topic> |
62 |
<affects> |
63 |
<package> |
64 |
<name>squid</name> |
65 |
<range><ge>3.5</ge><lt>3.5.6</lt></range> |
66 |
</package> |
67 |
</affects> |
68 |
<description> |
69 |
<body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> |
70 |
<p>Amos Jeffries, Squid-3 release manager, reports:</p> |
71 |
<blockquote cite="http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2015/07/06/8"> |
72 |
<p>Due to incorrect handling of peer responses in a hierarchy of 2 or |
73 |
more proxies remote clients (or scripts run on a client) are able to |
74 |
gain unrestricted access through a gateway proxy to its backend |
75 |
proxy.</p> |
76 |
<p>If the two proxies have differing levels of security this could |
77 |
lead to authentication bypass or unprivileged access to supposedly |
78 |
secure resources.</p> |
79 |
<p>Squid up to and including 3.5.5 are apparently vulnerable to DoS |
80 |
attack from malicious clients using repeated TLS renegotiation |
81 |
messages. This has not been verified as it also seems to require |
82 |
outdated (0.9.8l and older) OpenSSL libraries.</p> |
83 |
</blockquote> |
84 |
</body> |
85 |
</description> |
86 |
<references> |
87 |
<mlist>http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2015/07/06/8</mlist> |
88 |
</references> |
89 |
<dates> |
90 |
<discovery>2015-07-06</discovery> |
91 |
<entry>2015-07-06</entry> |
92 |
</dates> |
93 |
</vuln> |
94 |
|
95 |
<vuln vid="b6da24da-23f7-11e5-a4a5-002590263bf5"> |
96 |
<topic>squid -- client-first SSL-bump does not correctly validate X509 server certificate</topic> |
97 |
<affects> |
98 |
<package> |
99 |
<name>squid</name> |
100 |
<range><ge>3.5</ge><lt>3.5.4</lt></range> |
101 |
<range><ge>3.4</ge><lt>3.4.13</lt></range> |
102 |
</package> |
103 |
<package> |
104 |
<name>squid33</name> |
105 |
<range><ge>3.3</ge><lt>3.3.14</lt></range> |
106 |
</package> |
107 |
<package> |
108 |
<name>squid32</name> |
109 |
<range><ge>3.2</ge><lt>3.2.14</lt></range> |
110 |
</package> |
111 |
</affects> |
112 |
<description> |
113 |
<body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> |
114 |
<p>Squid security advisory 2015:1 reports:</p> |
115 |
<blockquote cite="http://www.squid-cache.org/Advisories/SQUID-2015_1.txt"> |
116 |
<p>Squid configured with client-first SSL-bump does not correctly |
117 |
validate X509 server certificate domain / hostname fields.</p> |
118 |
<p>The bug is important because it allows remote servers to bypass |
119 |
client certificate validation. Some attackers may also be able |
120 |
to use valid certificates for one domain signed by a global |
121 |
Certificate Authority to abuse an unrelated domain.</p> |
122 |
<p>However, the bug is exploitable only if you have configured |
123 |
Squid to perform SSL Bumping with the "client-first" or "bump" |
124 |
mode of operation.</p> |
125 |
<p>Sites that do not use SSL-Bump are not vulnerable.</p> |
126 |
<p>All Squid built without SSL support are not vulnerable to the |
127 |
problem.</p> |
128 |
</blockquote> |
129 |
<p>The FreeBSD port does not use SSL by default and is not vulnerable |
130 |
in the default configuration.</p> |
131 |
</body> |
132 |
</description> |
133 |
<references> |
134 |
<cvename>CVE-2015-3455</cvename> |
135 |
<url>http://www.squid-cache.org/Advisories/SQUID-2015_1.txt</url> |
136 |
</references> |
137 |
<dates> |
138 |
<discovery>2015-05-01</discovery> |
139 |
<entry>2015-07-06</entry> |
140 |
</dates> |
141 |
</vuln> |
142 |
|
60 |
<vuln vid="72fccfdf-2061-11e5-a4a5-002590263bf5"> |
143 |
<vuln vid="72fccfdf-2061-11e5-a4a5-002590263bf5"> |
61 |
<topic>ansible -- multiple vulnerabilities</topic> |
144 |
<topic>ansible -- multiple vulnerabilities</topic> |
62 |
<affects> |
145 |
<affects> |