CVE-2017-3737
Vulnerability Scoring
Security assessments indicate that CVE-2017-3737 presents a notable risk, potentially requiring prompt mitigation.
Security assessments indicate that CVE-2017-3737 presents a notable risk, potentially requiring prompt mitigation.
Status: Modified
Last updated: 🕒 21 Nov 2024, 03:26 UTC
Originally published on: 🕓 07 Dec 2017, 16:29 UTC
Time between publication and last update: 2540 days
CVSS Release: version 3
nvd@nist.gov
Primary
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVE-2017-3737: OpenSSL 1.0.2 (starting from version 1.0.2b) introduced an "error state" mechanism. The intent was that if a fatal error occurred during a handshake then OpenSSL would move into the error state and would immediately fail if you attempted to continue the handshake. This works as designed for the explicit handshake functions (SSL_do_handshake(), SSL_accept() and SSL_connect()), however due to a bug it does not work correctly if SSL_read() or SSL_write() is called directly. In that scenario, if the handshake fails then a fatal error will be returned in the initial function call. If SSL_read()/SSL_write() is subsequently called by the application for the same SSL object then it will succeed and the data is passed without being decrypted/encrypted directly from the SSL/TLS record layer. In order to exploit this issue an application bug would have to be present that resulted in a call to SSL_read()/SSL_write() being issued after having already received a fatal error. OpenSSL version 1.0.2b-1.0.2m are affected. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2n. OpenSSL 1.1.0 is not affected.
The exploitability of CVE-2017-3737 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).
CVE-2017-3737 presents a challenge to exploit due to its high attack complexity, but the absence of privilege requirements still makes it a viable target for skilled attackers. A thorough security review is advised.
A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.
Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.
Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2017-3737, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2017-3737, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
The EPSS score estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the near future.
EPSS Score: 92.159% (probability of exploit)
EPSS Percentile: 99.24%
(lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 0.7600000000000051% of others.
Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.