CVE-2004-0230

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

DescriptionStatementAdditional informationAffected PackagesFAQ

Description

The CVE Program describes this issue as:

TCP, when using a large Window Size, makes it easier for remote attackers to guess sequence numbers and cause a denial of service (connection loss) to persistent TCP connections by repeatedly injecting a TCP RST packet, especially in protocols that use long-lived connections, such as BGP.

Statement

The DHS advisory is a good source of background information about the issue: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2004/04/20/vulnerabilities-tcp It is important to note that the issue described is a known function of TCP. In order to perform a connection reset an attacker would need to know the source and destination ip address and ports as well as being able to guess the sequence number within the window. These requirements seriously reduce the ability to trigger a connection reset on normal TCP connections. The DHS advisory explains that BGP routing is a specific case where being able to trigger a reset is easier than expected as the end points can be easily determined and large window sizes are used. BGP routing is also signficantly affected by having its connections terminated. The major BGP peers have recently switched to requiring md5 signatures which mitigates against this attack. The following article from Linux Weekly News also puts the flaw into context and shows why it does not pose a significant threat: https://lwn.net/Articles/81560/ Red Hat does not have any plans for action regarding this issue.

The DHS advisory is a good source of background information about the issue: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2004/04/20/vulnerabilities-tcp

It is important to note that the issue described is a known function of TCP. In order to perform a connection reset an attacker would need to know the source and destination ip address and ports as well as being able to guess the sequence number within the window. These requirements seriously reduce the ability to trigger a connection reset on normal TCP connections. The DHS advisory explains that BGP routing is a specific case where being able to trigger a reset is easier than expected as the end points can be easily determined and large window sizes are used. BGP routing is also signficantly affected by having its connections terminated. The major BGP peers have recently switched to requiring md5 signatures which mitigates against this attack.

The following article from Linux Weekly News also puts the flaw into context and shows why it does not pose a significant threat: https://lwn.net/Articles/81560/

Red Hat does not have any plans for action regarding this issue.

Additional information

  • FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2004-0230

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

For open source software shipped by multiple vendors, the CVSS base scores may vary for each vendor's version depending on the version they ship, how they ship it, the platform, and even how the software is compiled. This makes scoring of vulnerabilities difficult for third-party vulnerability databases such as NVD that only provide a single CVSS base score for each vulnerability. Red Hat scores reflect how a vulnerability affects our products specifically.

For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?

  • "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
  • "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

A "will not fix" status means that a fix for an affected product version is not planned or not possible due to complexity, which may create additional risk.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

A deferred status means that a fix for an affected product version is not guaranteed due to higher-priority development work.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
  • Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.

What is a mitigation?

A mitigation is an action that can be taken to reduce the impact of a security vulnerability, without deploying any fixes.

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

The listed products were found to include one or more of the components that this vulnerability affects. These products underwent a thorough evaluation to determine their affectedness by this vulnerability. Note that layered products (such as container-based offerings) that consume affected components from any of the products listed in this table may be affected and are not represented.

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

In order to maintain code stability and compatibility, Red Hat usually does not rebase packages to entirely new versions. Instead, we backport fixes and new features to an older version of the package we distribute. This can result in some security scanners that only consider the package version to report the package as vulnerable. To avoid this, we suggest that you use an approved vulnerability scanner from our Red Hat Vulnerability Scanner Certification program.

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.