CVE-2018-1946 in Security Identity Governance
Summary
by MITRE
IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence 5.2 through 5.2.4.1 Virtual Appliance supports interaction between multiple actors and allows those actors to negotiate which algorithm should be used as a protection mechanism such as encryption or authentication, but it does not select the strongest algorithm that is available to both parties. IBM X-Force ID: 153388.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 07/11/2023
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2018-1946 affects IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence virtual appliance versions 5.2 through 5.2.4.1, representing a significant weakness in the cryptographic negotiation process that governs secure communications between multiple actors within the system. This flaw resides in the protocol selection mechanism that determines which cryptographic algorithms will be employed for encryption and authentication purposes during interactions between different system components or external entities. The vulnerability stems from the appliance's failure to implement a robust algorithm selection policy that would ensure both parties in a cryptographic negotiation choose the strongest mutually supported algorithm available. This weakness creates an exploitable condition where adversaries can potentially downgrade cryptographic protections by persuading the system to utilize weaker algorithms that are supported by both parties but not necessarily the strongest available options.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability manifests in the cryptographic protocol negotiation process where the system does not enforce a minimum security threshold for algorithm strength. This behavior creates opportunities for man-in-the-middle attacks and cryptographic downgrade attacks, where an attacker can manipulate the negotiation process to force the use of algorithms with known weaknesses or insufficient security margins. The vulnerability directly relates to CWE-327, which addresses the use of weak cryptographic algorithms, and CWE-326, which covers inadequate encryption strength in cryptographic implementations. The system's failure to select the strongest algorithm available to both parties during cryptographic negotiations creates a security gap that aligns with ATT&CK technique T1072 for application protocol manipulation and T1566 for credential harvesting through social engineering or protocol manipulation.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple cryptographic weakness to encompass broader security implications for identity governance and intelligence systems that rely on strong cryptographic protections. Organizations utilizing this virtual appliance may experience compromised authentication mechanisms, weakened encryption of sensitive identity data, and potential exposure of privileged credentials or access tokens that are protected by the flawed negotiation process. The vulnerability particularly affects environments where multiple actors interact through the appliance, as the cryptographic downgrade opportunities become more pronounced with increased complexity of interactions. Security assessments reveal that this weakness can lead to unauthorized access to identity management systems, compromise of user authentication processes, and potential data breaches involving sensitive identity information that flows through the affected appliance.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2018-1946 require immediate implementation of cryptographic policy enforcement mechanisms that ensure the selection of the strongest available algorithms during protocol negotiations. Organizations should implement mandatory cryptographic strength requirements that prevent the system from accepting weaker algorithms during negotiation processes, effectively closing the downgrade attack vectors. The recommended approach involves configuring the appliance to enforce minimum cryptographic strength requirements, typically through policy updates that mandate the use of specific algorithm suites with sufficient key lengths and security parameters. System administrators should also consider implementing network monitoring to detect anomalous cryptographic negotiation patterns and establish audit procedures to verify that cryptographic protocols are operating at expected security levels. IBM has released patches and updates to address this vulnerability, and organizations should prioritize applying these remediations while also conducting comprehensive security assessments to identify any potential exploitation attempts that may have occurred prior to patch implementation.