F5 Networks BIG-IP : IPv6 fragmentation vulnerability (K57211290)

high Nessus Plugin ID 101493
New! Plugin Severity Now Using CVSS v3

The calculated severity for Plugins has been updated to use CVSS v3 by default. Plugins that do not have a CVSS v3 score will fall back to CVSS v2 for calculating severity. Severity display preferences can be toggled in the settings dropdown.

Synopsis

The remote device is missing a vendor-supplied security patch.

Description

An issue was discovered in the IPv6 protocol specification, related to ICMP Packet Too Big (PTB) messages. (The scope of this CVE is all affected IPv6 implementations from all vendors.) The security implications of IP fragmentation have been discussed at length in [RFC6274] and [RFC7739]. An attacker can leverage the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments to trigger the use of fragmentation in an arbitrary IPv6 flow (in scenarios in which actual fragmentation of packets is not needed) and can subsequently perform any type of fragmentation-based attack against legacy IPv6 nodes that do not implement [RFC6946]. That is, employing fragmentation where not actually needed allows for fragmentation-based attack vectors to be employed, unnecessarily. We note that, unfortunately, even nodes that already implement [RFC6946] can be subject to DoS attacks as a result of the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments. Let us assume that Host A is communicating with Host B and that, as a result of the widespread dropping of IPv6 packets that contain extension headers (including fragmentation) [RFC7872], some intermediate node filters fragments between Host B and Host A. If an attacker sends a forged ICMPv6 PTB error message to Host B, reporting an MTU smaller than 1280, this will trigger the generation of IPv6 atomic fragments from that moment on (as required by [RFC2460]). When Host B starts sending IPv6 atomic fragments (in response to the received ICMPv6 PTB error message), these packets will be dropped, since we previously noted that IPv6 packets with extension headers were being dropped between Host B and Host A. Thus, this situation will result in a DoS scenario. Another possible scenario is that in which two BGP peers are employing IPv6 transport and they implement Access Control Lists (ACLs) to drop IPv6 fragments (to avoid control-plane attacks). If the aforementioned BGP peers drop IPv6 fragments but still honor received ICMPv6 PTB error messages, an attacker could easily attack the corresponding peering session by simply sending an ICMPv6 PTB message with a reported MTU smaller than 1280 bytes. Once the attack packet has been sent, the aforementioned routers will themselves be the ones dropping their own traffic. (CVE-2016-10142)

Solution

Upgrade to one of the non-vulnerable versions listed in the F5 Solution K57211290.

See Also

https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K57211290

Plugin Details

Severity: High

ID: 101493

File Name: f5_bigip_SOL57211290.nasl

Version: 3.13

Type: local

Published: 7/13/2017

Updated: 3/9/2020

Dependencies: f5_bigip_detect.nbin

Risk Information

VPR

Risk Factor: Medium

Score: 4.4

CVSS v2

Risk Factor: Medium

Base Score: 5

Temporal Score: 3.7

Vector: AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P

Temporal Vector: E:U/RL:OF/RC:C

CVSS v3

Risk Factor: High

Base Score: 8.6

Temporal Score: 7.5

Vector: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H

Temporal Vector: E:U/RL:O/RC:C

Vulnerability Information

CPE: cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_access_policy_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_advanced_firewall_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_application_acceleration_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_application_security_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_application_visibility_and_reporting, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_global_traffic_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_link_controller, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_local_traffic_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_policy_enforcement_manager, cpe:/a:f5:big-ip_webaccelerator, cpe:/h:f5:big-ip, cpe:/h:f5:big-ip_protocol_security_manager

Required KB Items: Host/local_checks_enabled, Host/BIG-IP/hotfix, Host/BIG-IP/modules, Host/BIG-IP/version

Exploit Ease: No known exploits are available

Patch Publication Date: 7/12/2017

Vulnerability Publication Date: 1/14/2017

Reference Information

CVE: CVE-2016-10142