Safenet Authentication Service for NPS Agent ACL access control
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 5.3 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability has been found in Safenet Authentication Service for NPS Agent and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the component ACL. The manipulation leads to access control. This vulnerability is referenced as CVE-2015-7964. The attack can only be performed from a local environment. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in Safenet Authentication Service for NPS Agent (the affected version unknown). This issue affects an unknown part of the component ACL. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a access control vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-264. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
SafeNet Authentication Service for NPS Agent uses a weak ACL for unspecified installation directories and executable modules, which allows local users to gain privileges by modifying an executable module.
The bug was discovered 03/31/2016. The weakness was published 03/02/2018 (Website). The advisory is shared at safenet.gemalto.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2015-7964 since 10/23/2015. An attack has to be approached locally. A simple authentication is necessary for exploitation. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1068 for this issue.
The vulnerability was handled as a non-public zero-day exploit for at least 701 days. During that time the estimated underground price was around $0-$5k.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
Similar entries are available at VDB-113999, VDB-114000, VDB-114001 and VDB-114002. If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 5.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 5.3
VulDB Base Score: 5.3
VulDB Temp Score: 5.3
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Access controlCWE: CWE-264
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: No
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
10/23/2015 🔍03/31/2016 🔍
03/02/2018 🔍
03/02/2018 🔍
03/03/2018 🔍
01/10/2020 🔍
Sources
Advisory: safenet.gemalto.comStatus: Not defined
Confirmation: 🔍
CVE: CVE-2015-7964 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2015-7964
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-114005
See also: 🔍
Entry
Created: 03/03/2018 10:03Updated: 01/10/2020 06:43
Changes: 03/03/2018 10:03 (42), 01/10/2020 06:43 (8)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.