CVE-2004-2761
Apache MD5 Certificate Spoofing Vulnerability
Description
The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm is not collision resistant, which makes it easier for context-dependent attackers to conduct spoofing attacks, as demonstrated by attacks on the use of MD5 in the signature algorithm of an X.509 certificate.
INFO
Published Date :
Jan. 5, 2009, 8:30 p.m.
Last Modified :
Nov. 20, 2024, 11:54 p.m.
Source :
[email protected]
Remotely Exploitable :
Yes !
Impact Score :
2.9
Exploitability Score :
10.0
Public PoC/Exploit Available at Github
CVE-2004-2761 has a 2 public PoC/Exploit available at Github.
Go to the Public Exploits tab to see the list.
References to Advisories, Solutions, and Tools
Here, you will find a curated list of external links that provide in-depth
information, practical solutions, and valuable tools related to
CVE-2004-2761.
We scan GitHub repositories to detect new proof-of-concept exploits. Following list is a collection of public exploits and proof-of-concepts, which have been published on GitHub (sorted by the most recently updated).
Windows下SSL证书制作工具-CVE-2004-2761漏洞修复
Tool to pull information from the National Vulnerability Database (NVD) Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs)
common-vulnerability-exposure cve-databases cve-search nvd vulnerability vulnerability-detection
Python
Results are limited to the first 15 repositories due to potential performance issues.
The following list is the news that have been mention
CVE-2004-2761 vulnerability anywhere in the article.
The following table lists the changes that have been made to the
CVE-2004-2761 vulnerability over time.
Vulnerability history details can be useful for understanding the evolution of a vulnerability, and for identifying the most recent changes that may impact the vulnerability's severity, exploitability, or other characteristics.
-
CVE Modified by af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108
Nov. 20, 2024
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2008/12/30/md5-weaknesses-could-lead-to-certificate-forgery/ Added Reference http://blogs.technet.com/swi/archive/2008/12/30/information-regarding-md5-collisions-problem.aspx Added Reference http://secunia.com/advisories/33826 Added Reference http://secunia.com/advisories/34281 Added Reference http://secunia.com/advisories/42181 Added Reference http://securityreason.com/securityalert/4866 Added Reference http://securitytracker.com/id?1024697 Added Reference http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_response09186a0080a5d24a.html Added Reference http://www.doxpara.com/research/md5/md5_someday.pdf Added Reference http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/836068 Added Reference http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/961509.mspx Added Reference http://www.phreedom.org/research/rogue-ca/ Added Reference http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/499685/100/0/threaded Added Reference http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/33065 Added Reference http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-740-1 Added Reference http://www.win.tue.nl/hashclash/rogue-ca/ Added Reference http://www.win.tue.nl/hashclash/SoftIntCodeSign/ Added Reference https://blogs.verisign.com/ssl-blog/2008/12/on_md5_vulnerabilities_and_mit.php Added Reference https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648886 Added Reference https://h20566.www2.hpe.com/portal/site/hpsc/public/kb/docDisplay?docId=emr_na-c05289935 Added Reference https://h20566.www2.hpe.com/portal/site/hpsc/public/kb/docDisplay?docId=emr_na-c05336888 Added Reference https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/advisories/ICSMA-18-058-02 Added Reference https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0837.html Added Reference https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0838.html Added Reference https://support.hpe.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docLocale=en_US&docId=emr_na-hpesbhf03814en_us Added Reference https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-package-announce/2009-February/msg00096.html -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
May. 14, 2024
Action Type Old Value New Value -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Oct. 19, 2018
Action Type Old Value New Value Removed Reference http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/archive/1/499685/100/0/threaded [No Types Assigned] Added Reference http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/499685/100/0/threaded [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
May. 10, 2018
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference https://support.hpe.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docLocale=en_US&docId=emr_na-hpesbhf03814en_us [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Mar. 28, 2018
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/advisories/ICSMA-18-058-02 [No Types Assigned] -
Modified Analysis by [email protected]
Feb. 01, 2017
Action Type Old Value New Value Changed Evaluator Impact There are four significant mitigating factors. 1) Most enterprise-class certificates, such as VeriSign’s Extended Validation SSL Certificates use the still secure SHA-1 hash function. 2) Certificates already issued with MD5 signatures are not at risk. The exploit only affects new certificate acquisitions. 3) CAs are quickly moving to replace MD5 with SHA-1. For example, VeriSign was planning to phase out MD5 by the end of January 2009. The date was pushed up due to the December proof of concept. On December 31, 2008, RapidSSL certificates shipped with SHA-1 digital signatures. 4)The researchers did not release the under-the-hood specifics of how the exploit was executed. Source - http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=724&tag=nl.e036 There are four significant mitigating factors. 1) Most enterprise-class certificates, such as VeriSign’s Extended Validation SSL Certificates use the still secure SHA-1 hash function. 2) Certificates already issued with MD5 signatures are not at risk. The exploit only affects new certificate acquisitions. 3) CAs are quickly moving to replace MD5 with SHA-1. For example, VeriSign was planning to phase out MD5 by the end of January 2009. The date was pushed up due to the December proof of concept. On December 31, 2008, RapidSSL certificates shipped with SHA-1 digital signatures. 4)The researchers did not release the under-the-hood specifics of how the exploit was executed. Source - http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/the-new-md5-ssl-exploit-is-not-the-end-of-civilization-as-we-know-it/?tag=nl.e036 Changed Reference Type http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/836068 US Government Resource http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/836068 Third Party Advisory, US Government Resource Changed Reference Type https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648886 No Types Assigned https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648886 Issue Tracking Changed Reference Type http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/961509.mspx No Types Assigned http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/961509.mspx Mitigation, Vendor Advisory, Patch Changed CPE Configuration AND OR *cpe:2.3:a:ietf:md5:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* OR cpe:2.3:a:ietf:x.509_certificate:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* AND OR *cpe:2.3:a:ietf:md5:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:* OR cpe:2.3:a:ietf:x.509_certificate:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:* -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Nov. 22, 2016
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference https://h20566.www2.hpe.com/portal/site/hpsc/public/kb/docDisplay?docId=emr_na-c05336888 [No Types Assigned] -
CVE Modified by [email protected]
Sep. 28, 2016
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Reference https://h20566.www2.hpe.com/portal/site/hpsc/public/kb/docDisplay?docId=emr_na-c05289935 -
Initial Analysis by [email protected]
Jan. 06, 2009
Action Type Old Value New Value
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration
While CVE identifies
specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorizes the common flaws or
weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2004-2761 is
associated with the following CWEs:
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification
(CAPEC)
stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and
approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2004-2761
weaknesses.
Exploit Prediction
EPSS is a daily estimate of the probability of exploitation activity being observed over the next 30 days.
7.29 }} 6.18%
score
0.93996
percentile