Vulnerabilities > CVE-2019-1683 - Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in Cisco products
Summary
A vulnerability in the certificate handling component of the Cisco SPA112, SPA525, and SPA5X5 Series IP Phones could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to listen to or control some aspects of a Transport Level Security (TLS)-encrypted Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) conversation. The vulnerability is due to the improper validation of server certificates. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by crafting a malicious server certificate to present to the client. An exploit could allow an attacker to eavesdrop on TLS-encrypted traffic and potentially route or redirect calls initiated by an affected device. Affected software include version 7.6.2 of the Cisco Small Business SPA525 Series IP Phones and Cisco Small Business SPA5X5 Series IP Phones and version 1.4.2 of the Cisco Small Business SPA500 Series IP Phones and Cisco Small Business SPA112 Series IP Phones.
Vulnerable Configurations
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
- Creating a Rogue Certificate Authority Certificate An attacker exploits a weakness in the MD5 hash algorithm (weak collision resistance) to generate a certificate signing request (CSR) that contains collision blocks in the "to be signed" part. The attacker specially crafts two different, but valid X.509 certificates that when hashed with the MD5 algorithm would yield the same value. The attacker then sends the CSR for one of the certificates to the Certification Authority which uses the MD5 hashing algorithm. That request is completely valid and the Certificate Authority issues an X.509 certificate to the attacker which is signed with its private key. An attacker then takes that signed blob and inserts it into another X.509 certificate that the attacker generated. Due to the MD5 collision, both certificates, though different, hash to the same value and so the signed blob works just as well in the second certificate. The net effect is that the attackers' second X.509 certificate, which the Certification Authority has never seen, is now signed and validated by that Certification Authority. To make the attack more interesting, the second certificate could be not just a regular certificate, but rather itself a signing certificate. Thus the attacker is able to start their own Certification Authority that is anchored in its root of trust in the legitimate Certification Authority that has signed the attackers' first X.509 certificate. If the original Certificate Authority was accepted by default by browsers, so will now the Certificate Authority set up by the attacker and of course any certificates that it signs. So the attacker is now able to generate any SSL certificates to impersonate any web server, and the user's browser will not issue any warning to the victim. This can be used to compromise HTTPS communications and other types of systems where PKI and X.509 certificates may be used (e.g., VPN, IPSec) .