Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OpenSSL Bug Allows Attackers To Read Memory In 64k Chunks

Posted by Unknown on from the check-your-bounds dept.

Bismillah (993337) writes "A potentially very serious bug in OpenSSL 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 beta has been discovered that can leak just about any information, from keys to content. Better yet, it appears to have been introduced in 2011, and known since March 2012." Quoting the security advisory: "A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal up to 64k of memory to a connected client or server." The attack may be repeated and it appears trivial to acquire the host's private key. If you were running a vulnerable release, it is even suggested that you go as far as revoking all of your keys. Distributions using OpenSSL 0.9.8 are not vulnerable (Debian Squeeze vintage). Debian Wheezy, Ubuntu 12.04.4, Centos 6.5, Fedora 18, SuSE 12.2, OpenBSD 5.4, FreeBSD 8.4, and NetBSD 5.0.2 and all following releases are vulnerable. OpenSSL released 1.0.1g today addressing the vulnerability. Debian's fix is in incoming and should hit mirrors soon, Fedora is having some trouble applying their patches, but a workaround patch to the package .spec (disabling heartbeats) is available for immediate application.

9 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. Thanks Jerks by s.petry · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now how are we supposed to collect people's private information without their knowledge? Think of the children and all of the terrorists captured with this exploit in the wild!

    sincerely,
    NSA

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  2. No Problem Here by sk999 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Never trusted openssl - only use GnuTLS.
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

  3. Theo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Could someone please give Theo a heap of grief over this from me? He's always so quick to bag out GnuTLS and others when they have an issue. Only fair he gets a share of what he dishes out. Besides, this seems to be even worse than a "goto fail"...

  4. Um, whoosh? by cbhacking · · Score: 1, Funny

    How the fuck did this get modded up? Idiot mods (and "DarwinSurvivor", apparently) can't read a link, I guess...

    The only way this could have been stupider is if it was actually the same link, instead of merely being a link that I could tell, just from the URL, was about exactly the same issue.

    Morons.

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  5. Windows by Kaenneth · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good thing I use WIndows, so I'm safe.

    1. Re:Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Unfortunately it is XP, so you are safe until 12:00.

  6. Yes!!! by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Funny

    *air-punch*

    I knew procrastinating Debian upgrades for most of a decade would pay off! I am VINDICATED!

  7. Re:Ironic by Mitchell314 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Silly, all "Open*" projects are owned by OpenBSD. Like OpenGL. And OpenOffice. :p

    --
    I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
  8. Re:It's really annoying by lennier · · Score: 3, Funny

    This bug is almost 10 years old

    Well look who natively counts in binary.

    Hello Joshua! Give my regards to Dr Falken.

    --
    You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC