freebsd security - Apr 2004 - Possible security hole in racoon verified on FreeBSD using racoon-20030711

Hi,

while testing racoon on Linux (based on the ported ipsec-tools) the
following issue appeared:
Racoon did not verify the RSA Signatures during Phase 1 in either main
or aggressive mode.
Authentication was possible using a correct certificate and a wrong
private key.

I have verified the below problem using racoon-20030711 on FreeBSD 4.9. I will
test
it using the SNAP Kit but suspect it to be vulnerable, too.

Probably other implementations like racoon and MacOSX are vulnerable, too.

On Linux the issue was resolved with the attached patch.

Could you look into this?

I would like to publish a Bugtraq report after the weekend, provided that you
have confirmed
that either your racoon is not vulnerable or you have patches available.

Regards,

Ralf
-- 
Ralf Spenneberg
UNIX/Linux Trainer and Consultant, RHCE, RHCX
Waldring 34                             48565 Steinfurt         Germany
Fon: +49(0)2552 638 755                 Fax: +49(0)2552 638 757
Mobil: +49(0)177 567 27 40
 
Markt+Technik Buch:                     Intrusion Detection f?r Linux Server
Addison-Wesley Buch: 			VPN mit Linux
IPsec-Howto:                                http://www.ipsec-howto.org
IPsec/PPTP Kernels for Red Hat Linux:   http://www.spenneberg.com/.net/.org/.de
Honeynet Project Mirror:                http://honeynet.spenneberg.org
Snort Mirror:                           http://snort.spenneberg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url :
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/attachments/20040407/53a9df78/attachment.bin

Ralf Spenneberg wrote:
[snip]
> On Linux the issue was resolved with the attached patch.
Hey Ralf,

The patch didn't make it to our (FreeBSD) list; I suspect the others 
have not received the patch as well. Additionally, this 
(security@freebsd.org) is a public mailing list, so you just disclosed 
the problem ;)

Kind regards,

Devon H. O'Dell