Overview
Multiple TCP/IP implementations do not adequately validate ICMP error messages. A remote attacker could cause TCP connections to drop or be degraded using spoofed ICMP error messages.
Description
A number of widely accepted Internet standards describe different aspects of the relationships between the Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) and Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). In particular, RFC 1122 explains how TCP should respond to ICMP messages: 4.2.3.9 ICMP Messages TCP MUST act on an ICMP error message passed up from the IP layer, directing it to the connection that created the error. The necessary demultiplexing information can be found in the IP header contained within the ICMP message. o Source Quench TCP MUST react to a Source Quench by slowing transmission on the connection. The RECOMMENDED procedure is for a Source Quench to trigger a "slow start," as if a retransmission timeout had occurred. o Destination Unreachable -- codes 0, 1, 5 Since these Unreachable messages indicate soft error conditions, TCP MUST NOT abort the connection, and it SHOULD make the information available to the application. DISCUSSION: TCP could report the soft error condition directly to the application layer with an upcall to the ERROR_REPORT routine, or it could merely note the message and report it to the application only when and if the TCP connection times out. o Destination Unreachable -- codes 2-4 These are hard error conditions, so TCP SHOULD abort the connection. o Time Exceeded -- codes 0, 1 This should be handled the same way as Destination Unreachable codes 0, 1, 5 (see above). o Parameter Problem This should be handled the same way as Destination Unreachable codes 0, 1, 5 (see above). An ICMP message contains the IP header and the first 8 bytes of the transport layer (TCP) segment that caused the error condition (this covers IP and TCP header information). In order to match an ICMP message to a TCP connection, TCP stack implementations generally match the source and destination TCP port and IP address four-tuple from the data returned in the ICMP message. An attacker who knows or can guess this four-tuple can create spoofed ICMP messages. By setting ICMP types and codes to indicate hard or soft error conditions, the attacker may be able to cause valid TCP connections to be reset or degraded. An attacker may also be able to take advantage of path MTU discovery functionality by spoofing ICMP type 3 (Destination Unreachable) code 4 (Fragmentation Needed but Don't Fragment Bit Set) messages and lowering the MTU for a connection (this is described in section 8 of RFC 1191). Note that any protocols that use path MTU discovery and state-based transport layer protocols other than TCP could also be affected. Further details about this vulnerability are available in an IETF Internet Draft titled "ICMP attacks against TCP" authored by Fernando Gont. |
Impact
A remote attacker could cause TCP connections to drop or be degraded using spoofed ICMP error messages. Applications that depend on on long-lived, low latency, or high throughput TCP connections may not function correctly on a degraded TCP connection. In order to spoof an ICMP message, an attacker would need to know or guess the source and destination TCP port and IP address four-tuple. The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is of paticular concern since it relies on long-lived TCP connections (VU#415294), uses well-known source and destination ports, provides critical network and Internet routing information, and may require a non-trivial period of time to recover from a sustained attack. |
Solution
Upgrade or apply a patch |
Vendor Information
Alcatel Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Allied Telesyn International Affected
Updated: April 29, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
For customers in Japan, Allied Telesis K.K. which is a member of AT-Group has published a statement only for Japanese market. Please visit the following web sites.
http://jvn.jp/niscc/532967/522154/index.html (Japanese)
http://www.allied-telesis.co.jp/support/list/faq/vuls/vulsall.html (Japanese)
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Cisco Systems, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20050412-icmp.shtml.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Extreme Networks Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 21, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Extreme Networks products running "Extremeware 7.x" software are vulnerable to this issue. Extreme Networks products running "Extremeware EXOS" software are not vulnerable.
Workaround: Apply filter to block ICMP packets with specific type/code which can cause the attack.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
F5 Networks, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: May 03, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
F5 products BIG-IP 4.x and 9.x are vulnerable. Patches are being made ready. TrafficShield and FirePass are not vulnerable.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Further information is available in Secunia Advisory SA15205.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Hewlett-Packard Company Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
SOURCE: Hewlett-Packard CompanySoftware Security Response Team
x-ref:SSRT4884
HP is investigating the potential impact to HP's products.
As further information becomes available HP will provide notice through standard security bulletin announcements.
To report potential security vulnerabilities in HP software, send an E-mail message to security-alert@hp.com.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see HPSBUX01164/SSRT4884 (HP-UX) and HPSBTU01210/SSRT4743 (HP Tru64 UNIX).
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Hitachi Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
[[VULNERABLE]<br>
Hitachi GR2000/GR4000/GS4000/GS3000 are vulnerable to this issue. More details are available at <http://www.hitachi.co.jp/Prod/comp/network/notice/NISCC-532967.html> (Japanese).]
[NOT VULNERABLE]
Alaxala AX series are NOT vulnerable.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en and http://jvn.jp/niscc/532967/index.html (Japanese).
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
IBM Corporation Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
The AIX Operating System is affected by the issues discussed in CERT Vulnerability note VU#222750 and NISCC vulnerability #432967. An advisory for this issue will be available via https://techsupport.services.ibm.com/server/pseries.subscriptionSvcs
For information related to this and other published CERT Advisories that may relate to the IBM eServer Platforms (xSeries, iSeries, pSeries, and zSeries) please go to https://app-06.www.ibm.com/servers/resourcelink/lib03020.nsf/pages/securityalerts?OpenDocument&pathID=
In order to access this information you will require a Resource Link ID. To subscribe to Resource Link go to http://app-06.www.ibm.com/servers/resourcelink and follow the steps for registration.
All questions should be refferred to servsec@us.ibm.com.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Juniper Networks, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: May 05, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
Juniper Networks M-series and T-series routers running software built prior to August 18, 2004, are susceptible to this vulnerability. Software built on or after that date disables processing of ICMP Source Quench messages, permits the user to disable Path MTU Discovery, and has additional verification enabled for PMTUD. The various forms of ICMP Unreachable messages are already ignored except during session establishment.
Other Juniper Networks products are not susceptible to this vulnerability. Customers should visit the Juniper Networks Customer Service Center web-site for further information:
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en and https://www.juniper.net/customers/csc.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Microsoft Corporation Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 29, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-019.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Netfilter Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 29, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
The Linux kernel TCP/IP implementation has always been verifying the TCP sequence number embedded into the ICMP packet, and Linux end hosts are thus not affected by this vulnerability.
As for non-Linux machines protected by a netfilter/iptables firewall: netfilter/iptables did not implement TCP sequence number (aka window) tracking at all until linux-2.6.9.
However, even in linux >= 2.6.9, the check for RELATED ICMP packets does not verify the tcp sequence number of the encapsulated packet.
Implementation of such a check is scheduled for inclusion into the 2.6.11 linux kernel.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Network Appliance Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 11, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
The Data ONTAP operating system has historically implemented some, but not all, of the recommendations from http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-icmp-attacks-03.txt
NetApp has implemented the remaining recommendations under bug ID 138865. Customers may, as always, check bug status and download patches from http://now.netapp.com/
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Nortel Networks, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see Nortel Technical Bulletins 2005005697, 2005005700, and 2005005701 on the Nortel Securitiy Advisory Bulletins site.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
OpenBSD Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 21, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see 027: RELIABILITY FIX: August 25, 2004 for OpenBSD 3.4 and 015: RELIABILITY FIX: August 25, 2004 for OpenBSD 3.5.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Red Hat, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
CAN-2004-0790: A blind TCP connection reset
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 and 3 kernels have always verified the TCP sequence number on ICMP errors. In addition Linux kernels will never abort a connection due to a received ICMP packet. All Red Hat Enterprise Linux versions are therefore unaffected by this issue.
CAN-2004-0791: A spoofing attack with ICMP type 4 header
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 and 3 kernels prior to January 2005 honour ICMP Source Quench messages, although the TCP sequence number is checked which substantially increases the amount of effort an attacker would need to be able to cause a sucessful attack. ICMP Source Quench messages were disabled completely by the following updates:
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-043.html
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-016.html
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-017.html
CAN-2004-1060: ICMP path MTU spoofing
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 and 3 kernels verify the sequence number on ICMP errors, thus significantly mitigating this issue. This issue can also be mitigated by disabling pmtu discovery if not required (/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_no_pmtu_disc)
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Redback Networks Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
Like most of TCP implementations, both product lines of Redback Networks, Subscriber Management System and SmartEdge Router Family are affected by this vulnerability.
The fixes will be available on both platforms in upcoming releases.
For further assistance regarding this topic contact the Redback Networks Technical Assistance Center (TAC). TAC is prepared to provide worldwide support for security workarounds that address this issue. The Redback domestic TAC number is (877) 733 2225 and International TAC phone number is 31-104987777. Redback TAC will provide detailed information to our worldwide systems engineers and focal engineers to assist customers in configuring these workarounds.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
SCO Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
SCO is aware of the issue and is working on a fix.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
For UnixWare 7.1.4 the fix is included in maintenance pack 2:
http://www.sco.com/support/update/download/release.php?rid=58
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Sun Microsystems, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
Sun is only marginally impacted by the issues described in Gont's ICMP Internet Draft as existing TCP connections will not be dropped. There may be a performance impact but no more or less than flooding any link or system with garbage messages will cause performance problems. Sun is issuing Sun Alert 57746 to further describe Sun's specific impact and details which will be available here:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-26-57746-1
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Symantec Corporation Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: May 03, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see SYM05-008.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
WatchGuard Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 11, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
All WatchGuard firewalls are impacted to some extent by Gont's findings. TCP sessions which terminate on or pass through the firewall are vulnerable to reset attacks when the attacker can guess the source and destination address and port combinations for that session. WatchGuard plans to address the issues raised by Gont's paper for all products in software releases currently scheduled for the Q2-Q3 2005 time frame. If you have further questions about this or any other security concern with WatchGuard products, please contact:
Steve Fallin
Director, Rapid Response Team
WatchGuard Technologies
http://www.watchguard.com
steve.fallin@watchguard.com
+1.206.521.8340
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Wind River Systems, Inc. Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Affected
Vendor Statement
In all releases after VxWorks 5.3 a hard error does not result in TCP aborting the connection. The hard error code is saved by TCP. If the connection is dropped due to a timeout this error code is available to the application. Wind River Network Stack 2.0 already checks the ICMP sequence numbers. The release of VxWorks 6.0 and the MSP updates shipping in the fall of 2004 are based on this stack.
Wind River is planning updates to the VxWorks 5.5 and 5.4 versions of the stack that will include the fix for ICMP. These updates are planned for 2005.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Check Point Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Check Point products are not vulnerable to this issue.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Clavister Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Clavister Firewall is itself not vulnerable to this class of attacks. It also attempts to protect clients against such attacks.
Specifically:
- No ICMP errors are passed by default. They may however be allowed on a per-rule/service basis.
- The firewall's own TCP stack (used by internal processes and ALGs) does not listen ICMP errors at all.
- All sequence numbers are scrambled using a high quality random engine, making sequence number guessing harder.
- In the case of many-to-one (dynamic) NAT, source port numbers are allocated randomly, making source port number guessing harder. See draft-gont-tcpm-icmp-attacks-00 section 5.3
- On not accepting ICMP errors: The method outlined in draft-gont-tcpm-icmp-attacks-00 section 5.2 (delaying the connection reset) results in behavior not too dissimilar. The difference simply lies in how many packets that get sent before the connection is failed.
- PMTU discovery problems that normally arise by not accepting ICMP errors by default are avoided by doing DF bit stripping by default.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Cyber Guard Not Affected
Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Enterasys Networks Not Affected
Updated: June 15, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see <http://www.enterasys.com/support/security/advisories/222750.pdf>
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Fedora Project Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
CAN-2004-0790: A blind TCP connection reset by sending
The Linux 2.4 and 2.6 kernels have always verified the TCP sequence number on ICMP errors. In addition Linux kernels will never abort a connection due to a received ICMP packet. All Fedora Core versions are therefore unaffected by this issue.
CAN-2004-0791: A spoofing attack with ICMP type 4 header
The Linux kernel since 2.6.9 and 2.4.28 has included a patch by Dave Miller to ignore ICMP Source Quench messages as recommended by Fernando Gont. Fedora Core 3 shipped with a 2.6.9 kernel which ignores ICMP Source Quench messages. Fedora Core 2 was updated to a 2.6.9 kernel in a November 2004 update and is therefore also unaffected by this issue.
CAN-2004-1060: ICMP path MTU spoofing
Linux 2.4 and 2.6 kernels verify the sequence number on ICMP errors, thus significantly mitigating this issue. This issue can also be mitigated by disabling pmtu discovery if not required (/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_no_pmtu_disc)
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Fortinet Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 21, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Fortinet does not have this problem.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Foundry Networks Inc. Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Foundry's implementation of ICMP on its products is not vulnerable to this type of attack.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Fujitsu Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en, http://software.fujitsu.com/jp/security/niscc/niscc.html#222750-tcpicmp, and http://jvn.jp/niscc/532967/index.html (Japanese).
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Intoto Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We analyzed the potential threats discussed in the IETF draft
draft-gont-tcpm-icmp-attacks-00.txt
and observed that Intoto products are not vulnerable to the described denial of service (DoS) attacks.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
NEC Corporation Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
NEC Corporation products are not susceptible to this vulnerability.
- We continue to check our products.
- For more detail:
- http://www.sw.nec.co.jp/psirt/index.html (Japanese)
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Netscreen Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Juniper Networks M-series and T-series routers running certain releases of JUNOS software are susceptible to this vulnerability. Other Juniper Networks products are not susceptible to this vulnerability. Customers should visit the Juniper Networks Customer Service Center web-site for further information.
http://www.juniper.net/customers/csc
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Secure Computing Corporation Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Secure Computing has carefully analyzed the scenarios outlined in the Internet Draft, and has determined that the Sidewinder G2 responds appropriately in those situations. Some of the scenarios mentioned in this draft illustrate again the desirability of using carefully configured security appliances and using protocols such as IPsec.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
SecureWorks Not Affected
Updated: May 03, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Stonesoft Not Affected
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
Stonesoft StoneGate Firewall and IPS products are not affected by these vulnerabilities.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Tech Matrix Not Affected
Updated: April 29, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://jvn.jp/niscc/532967/index.html (Japanese).
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Yamaha Not Affected
Updated: April 29, 2005
Status
Not Affected
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://jvn.jp/niscc/532967/index.html (Japanese).
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
3Com Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
AT&T Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Apple Computer, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en. Apple Mac OS X versions prior to 10.2 may be affected.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Avaya Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Avici Systems Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Borderware Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Charlotte's Web Networks Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Chiaro Networks Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Computer Associates Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Cray Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Data Connection Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Debian Linux Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Dlink Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
EMC Corporation Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Engarde Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
FreeBSD, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
GTA Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Hyperchip Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
IP Filter Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Immunix Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Ingrian Networks, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Intel Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Lachman Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Linksys Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Lucent Technologies Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Luminous Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Mandriva, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Mandriva, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
MontaVista Software, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Multi-Tech Systems Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Multinet Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
NetBSD Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Network Associates Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 12, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
NextHop Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: April 21, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
NextHop Technologies software does not include a TCP/IP stack. Instead, it relies on third party TCP/IP stacks. As a result, NextHop software is not directly affected by this vulnerability.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Nokia Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Novell, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Openwall GNU/*/Linux Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Polycom Inc. Unknown
Updated: September 08, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
Please see http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf?lang=en and the Security Headlines posted at the Polycom Security Center.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Riverstone Networks Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
SGI Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
SUSE Linux Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
SecureWorx Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: May 03, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Sequent Computer Systems, Inc. Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Sony Corporation Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
TurboLinux Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Unisys Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
ZyXEL Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
eSoft Unknown
Notified: August 12, 2004 Updated: February 07, 2005
Status
Unknown
Vendor Statement
We have not received a statement from the vendor.
Vendor Information
The vendor has not provided us with any further information regarding this vulnerability.
Addendum
US-CERT has no additional comments at this time.
If you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
CVSS Metrics
| Group | Score | Vector |
|---|---|---|
| Base | ||
| Temporal | ||
| Environmental |
References
- http://www.gont.com.ar/drafts/icmp-attacks-against-tcp.html
- http://tools.ietf.org/wg/opsec/draft-gont-opsec-icmp-filtering-00.txt
- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc792.txt
- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1122.txt
- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1191.txt
- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1323.txt
- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2385.txt
- http://www.niscc.gov.uk/niscc/docs/re-20050412-00303.pdf
- http://jvn.jp/niscc/532967/index.html
- http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/xfdb/17170
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0790
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0791
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-1060
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2005-0065
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2005-0066
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2005-0067
- http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2005-0068
- http://www.securiteam.com/securitynews/5AP0D2A35U.html
- http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure-02.txt
- http://www.ietf.org/ietf/03mar/plpmtud.txt
- http://www.psc.edu/~mathis/MTU/
- http://www.cymru.com/Documents/icmp-messages.html
- http://secunia.com/advisories/14904/
- http://securitytracker.com/alerts/2005/Apr/1013686.html
Acknowledgements
Information about the security risks of ICMP messages has been known for some time (RFC 1191 was published in 1990). More recent work by Fernando Gont (Universidad Tecnológica Nacional - Facultad Regional Haedo) describes different types of ICMP attacks against TCP and proposes a number of defense techniques. Gont's research is documented in an IETF Internet Draft titled "ICMP attacks against TCP" (revision 3 as of this writing). Jonathan Looney researched and reported a specific ICMP attack that affects TCP connections on Microsoft Windows systems.
This document was written by Art Manion.
Other Information
| CVE IDs: | None |
| Severity Metric: | 12.48 |
| Date Public: | 2005-04-12 |
| Date First Published: | 2005-04-12 |
| Date Last Updated: | 2008-04-22 22:34 UTC |
| Document Revision: | 90 |