CVE-2022-29173 (GCVE-0-2022-29173)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2022-05-05 22:30 – Updated: 2025-04-23 18:31
VLAI?
Title
No protection against rollback attacks in go-tuf
Summary
go-tuf is a Go implementation of The Update Framework (TUF). go-tuf does not correctly implement the client workflow for updating the metadata files for roles other than the root role. Specifically, checks for rollback attacks are not implemented correctly meaning an attacker can cause clients to install software that is older than the software which the client previously knew to be available, and may include software with known vulnerabilities. In more detail, the client code of go-tuf has several issues in regards to preventing rollback attacks: 1. It does not take into account the content of any previously trusted metadata, if available, before proceeding with updating roles other than the root role (i.e., steps 5.4.3.1 and 5.5.5 of the detailed client workflow). This means that any form of version verification done on the newly-downloaded metadata is made using the default value of zero, which always passes. 2. For both timestamp and snapshot roles, go-tuf saves these metadata files as trusted before verifying if the version of the metafiles they refer to is correct (i.e., steps 5.5.4 and 5.6.4 of the detailed client workflow). A fix is available in version 0.3.0 or newer. No workarounds are known for this issue apart from upgrading.
Severity ?
CWE
- CWE-354 - Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value
Assigner
References
| URL | Tags | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| theupdateframework | go-tuf |
Affected:
< 0.3.0
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T06:17:54.093Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM",
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC",
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-29173",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-04-23T15:53:34.573720Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-23T18:31:00.276Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "go-tuf",
"vendor": "theupdateframework",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 0.3.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "go-tuf is a Go implementation of The Update Framework (TUF). go-tuf does not correctly implement the client workflow for updating the metadata files for roles other than the root role. Specifically, checks for rollback attacks are not implemented correctly meaning an attacker can cause clients to install software that is older than the software which the client previously knew to be available, and may include software with known vulnerabilities. In more detail, the client code of go-tuf has several issues in regards to preventing rollback attacks: 1. It does not take into account the content of any previously trusted metadata, if available, before proceeding with updating roles other than the root role (i.e., steps 5.4.3.1 and 5.5.5 of the detailed client workflow). This means that any form of version verification done on the newly-downloaded metadata is made using the default value of zero, which always passes. 2. For both timestamp and snapshot roles, go-tuf saves these metadata files as trusted before verifying if the version of the metafiles they refer to is correct (i.e., steps 5.5.4 and 5.6.4 of the detailed client workflow). A fix is available in version 0.3.0 or newer. No workarounds are known for this issue apart from upgrading."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-354",
"description": "CWE-354: Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2022-05-05T22:30:12.000Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "No protection against rollback attacks in go-tuf",
"x_legacyV4Record": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
"ID": "CVE-2022-29173",
"STATE": "PUBLIC",
"TITLE": "No protection against rollback attacks in go-tuf"
},
"affects": {
"vendor": {
"vendor_data": [
{
"product": {
"product_data": [
{
"product_name": "go-tuf",
"version": {
"version_data": [
{
"version_value": "\u003c 0.3.0"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"vendor_name": "theupdateframework"
}
]
}
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "go-tuf is a Go implementation of The Update Framework (TUF). go-tuf does not correctly implement the client workflow for updating the metadata files for roles other than the root role. Specifically, checks for rollback attacks are not implemented correctly meaning an attacker can cause clients to install software that is older than the software which the client previously knew to be available, and may include software with known vulnerabilities. In more detail, the client code of go-tuf has several issues in regards to preventing rollback attacks: 1. It does not take into account the content of any previously trusted metadata, if available, before proceeding with updating roles other than the root role (i.e., steps 5.4.3.1 and 5.5.5 of the detailed client workflow). This means that any form of version verification done on the newly-downloaded metadata is made using the default value of zero, which always passes. 2. For both timestamp and snapshot roles, go-tuf saves these metadata files as trusted before verifying if the version of the metafiles they refer to is correct (i.e., steps 5.5.4 and 5.6.4 of the detailed client workflow). A fix is available in version 0.3.0 or newer. No workarounds are known for this issue apart from upgrading."
}
]
},
"impact": {
"cvss": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "CWE-354: Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj",
"refsource": "CONFIRM",
"url": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d"
}
]
},
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
}
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-29173",
"datePublished": "2022-05-05T22:30:12.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-04-13T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-23T18:31:00.276Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CVE Program Container\", \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\", \"x_transferred\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\", \"x_transferred\"]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108\", \"shortName\": \"CVE\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2024-08-03T06:17:54.093Z\"}}, {\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2022-29173\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"total\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2025-04-23T15:53:34.573720Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-04-23T15:53:36.203Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"No protection against rollback attacks in go-tuf\", \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 8, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"HIGH\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H\", \"integrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"userInteraction\": \"REQUIRED\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"LOW\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"theupdateframework\", \"product\": \"go-tuf\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"\u003c 0.3.0\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"go-tuf is a Go implementation of The Update Framework (TUF). go-tuf does not correctly implement the client workflow for updating the metadata files for roles other than the root role. Specifically, checks for rollback attacks are not implemented correctly meaning an attacker can cause clients to install software that is older than the software which the client previously knew to be available, and may include software with known vulnerabilities. In more detail, the client code of go-tuf has several issues in regards to preventing rollback attacks: 1. It does not take into account the content of any previously trusted metadata, if available, before proceeding with updating roles other than the root role (i.e., steps 5.4.3.1 and 5.5.5 of the detailed client workflow). This means that any form of version verification done on the newly-downloaded metadata is made using the default value of zero, which always passes. 2. For both timestamp and snapshot roles, go-tuf saves these metadata files as trusted before verifying if the version of the metafiles they refer to is correct (i.e., steps 5.5.4 and 5.6.4 of the detailed client workflow). A fix is available in version 0.3.0 or newer. No workarounds are known for this issue apart from upgrading.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-354\", \"description\": \"CWE-354: Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2022-05-05T22:30:12.000Z\"}, \"x_legacyV4Record\": {\"impact\": {\"cvss\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 8, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"HIGH\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H\", \"integrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"userInteraction\": \"REQUIRED\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"LOW\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}}, \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"affects\": {\"vendor\": {\"vendor_data\": [{\"product\": {\"product_data\": [{\"version\": {\"version_data\": [{\"version_value\": \"\u003c 0.3.0\"}]}, \"product_name\": \"go-tuf\"}]}, \"vendor_name\": \"theupdateframework\"}]}}, \"data_type\": \"CVE\", \"references\": {\"reference_data\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/security/advisories/GHSA-66x3-6cw3-v5gj\", \"refsource\": \"CONFIRM\"}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf/commit/ed6788e710fc3093a7ecc2d078bf734c0f200d8d\", \"refsource\": \"MISC\"}]}, \"data_format\": \"MITRE\", \"description\": {\"description_data\": [{\"lang\": \"eng\", \"value\": \"go-tuf is a Go implementation of The Update Framework (TUF). go-tuf does not correctly implement the client workflow for updating the metadata files for roles other than the root role. Specifically, checks for rollback attacks are not implemented correctly meaning an attacker can cause clients to install software that is older than the software which the client previously knew to be available, and may include software with known vulnerabilities. In more detail, the client code of go-tuf has several issues in regards to preventing rollback attacks: 1. It does not take into account the content of any previously trusted metadata, if available, before proceeding with updating roles other than the root role (i.e., steps 5.4.3.1 and 5.5.5 of the detailed client workflow). This means that any form of version verification done on the newly-downloaded metadata is made using the default value of zero, which always passes. 2. For both timestamp and snapshot roles, go-tuf saves these metadata files as trusted before verifying if the version of the metafiles they refer to is correct (i.e., steps 5.5.4 and 5.6.4 of the detailed client workflow). A fix is available in version 0.3.0 or newer. No workarounds are known for this issue apart from upgrading.\"}]}, \"problemtype\": {\"problemtype_data\": [{\"description\": [{\"lang\": \"eng\", \"value\": \"CWE-354: Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value\"}]}]}, \"data_version\": \"4.0\", \"CVE_data_meta\": {\"ID\": \"CVE-2022-29173\", \"STATE\": \"PUBLIC\", \"TITLE\": \"No protection against rollback attacks in go-tuf\", \"ASSIGNER\": \"security-advisories@github.com\"}}}}",
"cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2022-29173\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-04-23T18:31:00.276Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2022-04-13T00:00:00.000Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"datePublished\": \"2022-05-05T22:30:12.000Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\"}",
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…