CVE-2016-0883 in Cloud Foundry Ops Manager
Summary
by MITRE
Pivotal Cloud Foundry (PCF) Ops Manager before 1.5.14 and 1.6.x before 1.6.9 uses the same cookie-encryption key across different customers' installations, which allows remote attackers to bypass session authentication by leveraging knowledge of this key from another installation.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 04/18/2019
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2016-0883 represents a critical cryptographic weakness in Pivotal Cloud Foundry (PCF) Ops Manager versions prior to 1.5.14 and 1.6.x versions before 1.6.9. This flaw stems from the improper implementation of session management mechanisms where the system employs a static cookie-encryption key across multiple customer installations. The security implication arises from the fundamental principle that cryptographic keys should remain unique and isolated per deployment to prevent cross-tenant attacks. When the same encryption key is reused across different customer environments, it creates a scenario where an attacker can exploit knowledge of one installation's key to compromise sessions in other installations.
The technical nature of this vulnerability aligns with CWE-327, which addresses the use of insecure cryptographic algorithms and key management practices. Specifically, this represents a failure in implementing proper key separation between different customer deployments, violating the core security principle of isolation. The flaw operates through a session hijacking mechanism where attackers can decrypt session cookies from one customer installation and use the resulting authentication tokens to impersonate users in other installations. This cross-tenant attack vector is particularly dangerous in multi-tenant cloud environments where customer data isolation is paramount.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple authentication bypass to encompass potential data breaches and unauthorized access to sensitive customer information. Attackers leveraging this weakness could gain access to deployment configurations, application credentials, and other privileged information from multiple customer environments. The vulnerability affects the core authentication infrastructure of PCF Ops Manager, potentially allowing attackers to modify deployment settings, access restricted administrative functions, and compromise the integrity of multiple customer installations simultaneously. This creates a cascading security risk where a single compromised key can expose numerous customer environments.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability require immediate implementation of unique cryptographic keys per customer installation, along with proper key rotation mechanisms. Organizations should upgrade to PCF Ops Manager versions 1.5.14 or 1.6.9 and later, which address the key reuse issue through proper isolation of cryptographic materials. The solution involves implementing a key derivation function that generates unique keys based on installation-specific parameters, ensuring that each customer environment maintains independent cryptographic security boundaries. Additionally, security teams should conduct comprehensive audits of cryptographic key management practices and implement monitoring systems to detect unauthorized key usage patterns, aligning with the principles outlined in the NIST SP 800-57 standard for cryptographic key management.
The vulnerability demonstrates a classic example of improper key management in multi-tenant systems, where the reuse of cryptographic materials creates unintended security implications. This flaw highlights the importance of following secure coding practices as outlined in the OWASP Top Ten and the MITRE ATT&CK framework's credential access categories. The attack vector specifically maps to techniques involving credential theft and session hijacking, where adversaries exploit weak cryptographic implementations to gain unauthorized access to protected resources. Organizations must implement comprehensive key management policies that ensure cryptographic isolation between different customer deployments and maintain audit trails of key usage to prevent similar vulnerabilities in future implementations.