CVE-2025-27587 (GCVE-0-2025-27587)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2025-06-16 00:00
Modified
2025-06-26 16:17
CWE
  • n/a
Summary
OpenSSL 3.0.0 through 3.3.2 on the PowerPC architecture is vulnerable to a Minerva attack, exploitable by measuring the time of signing of random messages using the EVP_DigestSign API, and then using the private key to extract the K value (nonce) from the signatures. Next, based on the bit size of the extracted nonce, one can compare the signing time of full-sized nonces to signatures that used smaller nonces, via statistical tests. There is a side-channel in the P-364 curve that allows private key extraction (also, there is a dependency between the bit size of K and the size of the side channel). NOTE: This CVE is disputed because the OpenSSL security policy explicitly notes that any side channels which require same physical system to be detected are outside of the threat model for the software. The timing signal is so small that it is infeasible to be detected without having the attacking process running on the same physical system.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
n/a n/a Version: n/a
Show details on NVD website


{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "cvssV3_1": {
              "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
              "attackVector": "NETWORK",
              "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
              "baseScore": 5.3,
              "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
              "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
              "integrityImpact": "NONE",
              "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
              "scope": "UNCHANGED",
              "userInteraction": "NONE",
              "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
              "version": "3.1"
            }
          },
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2025-27587",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-06-26T16:16:27.533510Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "problemTypes": [
          {
            "descriptions": [
              {
                "cweId": "CWE-385",
                "description": "CWE-385 Covert Timing Channel",
                "lang": "en",
                "type": "CWE"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-06-26T16:17:47.596Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "n/a",
          "vendor": "n/a",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "n/a"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "OpenSSL 3.0.0 through 3.3.2 on the PowerPC architecture is vulnerable to a Minerva attack, exploitable by measuring the time of signing of random messages using the EVP_DigestSign API, and then using the private key to extract the K value (nonce) from the signatures. Next, based on the bit size of the extracted nonce, one can compare the signing time of full-sized nonces to signatures that used smaller nonces, via statistical tests. There is a side-channel in the P-364 curve that allows private key extraction (also, there is a dependency between the bit size of K and the size of the side channel). NOTE: This CVE is disputed because the OpenSSL security policy explicitly notes that any side channels which require same physical system to be detected are outside of the threat model for the software. The timing signal is so small that it is infeasible to be detected without having the attacking process running on the same physical system."
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "description": "n/a",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "text"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-06-16T21:51:53.496Z",
        "orgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
        "shortName": "mitre"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/24253"
        },
        {
          "url": "https://minerva.crocs.fi.muni.cz"
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        "disputed"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
    "assignerShortName": "mitre",
    "cveId": "CVE-2025-27587",
    "datePublished": "2025-06-16T00:00:00.000Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-03-03T00:00:00.000Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-06-26T16:17:47.596Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2025-27587\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"cve@mitre.org\",\"published\":\"2025-06-16T22:15:44.093\",\"lastModified\":\"2025-06-26T17:15:30.497\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Awaiting Analysis\",\"cveTags\":[{\"sourceIdentifier\":\"cve@mitre.org\",\"tags\":[\"disputed\"]}],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"OpenSSL 3.0.0 through 3.3.2 on the PowerPC architecture is vulnerable to a Minerva attack, exploitable by measuring the time of signing of random messages using the EVP_DigestSign API, and then using the private key to extract the K value (nonce) from the signatures. Next, based on the bit size of the extracted nonce, one can compare the signing time of full-sized nonces to signatures that used smaller nonces, via statistical tests. There is a side-channel in the P-364 curve that allows private key extraction (also, there is a dependency between the bit size of K and the size of the side channel). NOTE: This CVE is disputed because the OpenSSL security policy explicitly notes that any side channels which require same physical system to be detected are outside of the threat model for the software. The timing signal is so small that it is infeasible to be detected without having the attacking process running on the same physical system.\"},{\"lang\":\"es\",\"value\":\"OpenSSL 3.0.0 a 3.3.2 en la arquitectura PowerPC es vulnerable a un ataque Minerva. Este ataque se puede explotar midiendo el tiempo de firma de mensajes aleatorios mediante la API EVP_DigestSign y, posteriormente, utilizando la clave privada para extraer el valor K (nonce) de las firmas. A continuaci\u00f3n, bas\u00e1ndose en el tama\u00f1o en bits del nonce extra\u00eddo, se puede comparar el tiempo de firma de nonces de tama\u00f1o completo con el de firmas que utilizan nonces m\u00e1s peque\u00f1os mediante pruebas estad\u00edsticas. Existe un canal lateral en la curva P-364 que permite la extracci\u00f3n de la clave privada (adem\u00e1s, existe una dependencia entre el tama\u00f1o en bits de K y el tama\u00f1o del canal lateral). NOTA: Esta CVE es controvertida porque la pol\u00edtica de seguridad de OpenSSL indica expl\u00edcitamente que cualquier canal lateral que requiera la detecci\u00f3n del mismo sistema f\u00edsico queda fuera del modelo de amenazas del software. La se\u00f1al de tiempo es tan peque\u00f1a que es imposible detectarla sin que el proceso atacante se ejecute en el mismo sistema f\u00edsico.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":5.3,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"HIGH\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"LOW\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":1.6,\"impactScore\":3.6}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-385\"}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/24253\",\"source\":\"cve@mitre.org\"},{\"url\":\"https://minerva.crocs.fi.muni.cz\",\"source\":\"cve@mitre.org\"}]}}",
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 5.3, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"MEDIUM\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N\", \"integrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"HIGH\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"LOW\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}}, {\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2025-27587\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2025-06-26T16:16:27.533510Z\"}}}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-385\", \"description\": \"CWE-385 Covert Timing Channel\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-06-26T16:17:37.126Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"tags\": [\"disputed\"], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"n/a\", \"product\": \"n/a\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"n/a\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/24253\"}, {\"url\": \"https://minerva.crocs.fi.muni.cz\"}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"OpenSSL 3.0.0 through 3.3.2 on the PowerPC architecture is vulnerable to a Minerva attack, exploitable by measuring the time of signing of random messages using the EVP_DigestSign API, and then using the private key to extract the K value (nonce) from the signatures. Next, based on the bit size of the extracted nonce, one can compare the signing time of full-sized nonces to signatures that used smaller nonces, via statistical tests. There is a side-channel in the P-364 curve that allows private key extraction (also, there is a dependency between the bit size of K and the size of the side channel). NOTE: This CVE is disputed because the OpenSSL security policy explicitly notes that any side channels which require same physical system to be detected are outside of the threat model for the software. The timing signal is so small that it is infeasible to be detected without having the attacking process running on the same physical system.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"text\", \"description\": \"n/a\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca\", \"shortName\": \"mitre\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-06-16T21:51:53.496Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2025-27587\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-06-26T16:17:47.596Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2025-03-03T00:00:00.000Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca\", \"datePublished\": \"2025-06-16T00:00:00.000Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"mitre\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.1"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.


Loading…

Loading…