As of January 10, 2023, CISA will no longer be updating ICS security advisories for Siemens product vulnerabilities beyond the initial advisory. For the most up-to-date information on vulnerabilities in this advisory, please see Siemens’ ProductCERT Security Advisories (CERT Services | Services | Siemens Global). 

View CSAF

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CVSS v4 7.2
ATTENTION: Exploitable remotely/low attack complexity
Vendor: Siemens
Equipment: SINEC NMS
Vulnerabilities: Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions, Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory

2. RISK EVALUATION

Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities could allow an attacker to impact confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

3. TECHNICAL DETAILS

3.1 AFFECTED PRODUCTS

The following products of Siemens, are affected:

SINEC NMS: All versions prior to V2.0 SP2

3.2 Vulnerability Overview

3.2.1 IMPROPER CHECK FOR UNUSUAL OR EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS CWE-754

Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial-of-Service. While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817), DH_check_pub_key() does not make any of these checks and is therefore vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters. Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large P, it doesn’t check for an excessively large Q. An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial-of-Service attack. DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the “-pubcheck” option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.

CVE-2023-5678 has been assigned to this vulnerability. A CVSS v3 base score of 5.3 has been assigned; the CVSS vector string is (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L).

3.2.2 IMPROPER LIMITATION OF A PATHNAME TO A RESTRICTED DIRECTORY (‘PATH TRAVERSAL’) CWE-22

Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial-of-Service. While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817), DH_check_pub_key() doesn’t make any of these checks, and is therefore vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters. Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large P, it doesn’t check for an excessively large Q. An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial-of-Service attack. DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the “-pubcheck” option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.

CVE-2024-31978 has been assigned to this vulnerability. A CVSS v3 base score of 7.6 has been assigned; the CVSS vector string is (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H).

CVE-2024-31978 has been assigned to this vulnerability. A CVSS v4 base score of 7.2 has been assigned; the CVSS vector string is (CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N).

3.3 BACKGROUND

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECTORS: Critical Manufacturing
COUNTRIES/AREAS DEPLOYED: Worldwide
COMPANY HEADQUARTERS LOCATION: Germany

3.4 RESEARCHER

Siemens reported these vulnerabilities to CISA.

4. MITIGATIONS

Siemens has identified the following specific workarounds and mitigations users can apply to reduce risk:

SINEC NMS: Update to V2.0 SP2 or later version

As a general security measure, Siemens recommends protecting network access to devices with appropriate mechanisms. To operate the devices in a protected IT environment, Siemens recommends configuring the environment according to Siemens’ operational guidelines for industrial security and following recommendations in the product manuals.

Additional information on industrial security by Siemens can be found on the Siemens industrial security webpage.

For more information see the associated Siemens security advisory SSA-128433 in HTML and CSAF.

CISA recommends users take defensive measures to minimize the risk of exploitation of these vulnerabilities, such as:

Minimize network exposure for all control system devices and/or systems, ensuring they are not accessible from the internet.
Locate control system networks and remote devices behind firewalls and isolating them from business networks.
When remote access is required, use more secure methods, such as Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). Recognize VPNs may have vulnerabilities, should be updated to the most recent version available, and are only as secure as the connected devices.

CISA reminds organizations to perform proper impact analysis and risk assessment prior to deploying defensive measures.

CISA also provides a section for control systems security recommended practices on the ICS webpage on cisa.gov. Several CISA products detailing cyber defense best practices are available for reading and download, including Improving Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity with Defense-in-Depth Strategies.

CISA encourages organizations to implement recommended cybersecurity strategies for proactive defense of ICS assets.

Additional mitigation guidance and recommended practices are publicly available on the ICS webpage at cisa.gov in the technical information paper, ICS-TIP-12-146-01B–Targeted Cyber Intrusion Detection and Mitigation Strategies.

Organizations observing suspected malicious activity should follow established internal procedures and report findings to CISA for tracking and correlation against other incidents.

CISA also recommends users take the following measures to protect themselves from social engineering attacks:

Do not click web links or open attachments in unsolicited email messages.
Refer to Recognizing and Avoiding Email Scams for more information on avoiding email scams.
Refer to Avoiding Social Engineering and Phishing Attacks for more information on social engineering attacks.

No known public exploitation specifically targeting these vulnerabilities has been reported to CISA at this time.

5. UPDATE HISTORY

April 11, 2024: Initial Publication