CVE-2020-11031 in GLPI
Summary
by MITRE
In GLPI before version 9.5.0, the encryption algorithm used is insecure. The security of the data encrypted relies on the password used, if a user sets a weak/predictable password, an attacker could decrypt data. This is fixed in version 9.5.0 by using a more secure encryption library. The library chosen is sodium.
Once again VulDB remains the best source for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/23/2020
The vulnerability described in CVE-2020-11031 represents a critical weakness in the GLPI (Gestionnaire Libre de Parc Informatique) software ecosystem, specifically affecting versions prior to 9.5.0. This issue manifests as a cryptographic flaw that undermines the fundamental security assurances typically expected from encrypted data storage mechanisms. The vulnerability exists within the core encryption implementation of the GLPI platform, which is widely used for IT asset management and help desk services across various organizational environments. The insecure encryption algorithm creates a pathway for unauthorized data access when users select weak or predictable passwords, fundamentally compromising the confidentiality assurances that encryption is designed to provide. This weakness is particularly concerning given GLPI's deployment in enterprise environments where sensitive information about IT infrastructure, user credentials, and organizational data is routinely managed through the platform.
The technical flaw stems from the use of an inadequate encryption algorithm that fails to provide sufficient cryptographic strength to protect against modern attack vectors. When users select weak passwords, the encryption becomes vulnerable to brute force attacks, dictionary attacks, or rainbow table exploitation, allowing adversaries to recover the original plaintext data without proper authorization. The vulnerability directly relates to CWE-327, which addresses the use of insecure cryptographic algorithms, and more specifically aligns with CWE-326, focusing on inadequate encryption strength. This weakness demonstrates a critical failure in the security architecture where the strength of the encryption is directly proportional to the quality of the user-provided password rather than relying on robust algorithmic security. The implementation lacks proper key derivation functions and fails to employ industry-standard cryptographic practices that would ensure security regardless of password strength.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple data confidentiality breaches, potentially enabling attackers to access critical IT infrastructure information, user credentials, and organizational data that should remain protected. In enterprise environments where GLPI is deployed for managing sensitive IT assets, this vulnerability creates opportunities for attackers to gain unauthorized access to system configurations, software licenses, hardware inventories, and potentially user account information. The risk is exacerbated by the fact that many organizations may not have strict password policies enforced, leading to widespread vulnerability across deployments. This weakness also aligns with ATT&CK technique T1552, which covers "Unsecured Credentials" and can be leveraged by attackers to move laterally within networks or escalate privileges. Organizations using vulnerable GLPI versions face potential compliance violations, regulatory penalties, and reputational damage if data breaches occur due to this cryptographic weakness.
The remediation for CVE-2020-11031 requires upgrading to GLPI version 9.5.0 or later, which implements a more secure encryption library based on libsodium. This upgrade addresses the core cryptographic weakness by replacing the insecure algorithm with one that employs modern, well-vetted encryption standards. The sodium library provides authenticated encryption with associated data, ensuring both confidentiality and integrity of encrypted data. Organizations should also implement comprehensive password policies requiring strong, complex passwords and consider additional security measures such as multi-factor authentication to further protect against potential exploitation. The fix demonstrates proper security engineering practices by addressing the root cause rather than implementing superficial patches, and aligns with industry best practices for cryptographic implementation as outlined in NIST SP 800-57 and other cryptographic standards. This vulnerability serves as a reminder of the critical importance of regularly updating security software and maintaining robust cryptographic practices in enterprise environments.