Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Heartbleed not detected #202

Closed
ericrange opened this issue Mar 30, 2017 · 6 comments
Closed

Heartbleed not detected #202

ericrange opened this issue Mar 30, 2017 · 6 comments
Labels

Comments

@ericrange
Copy link

Seems that the heartbleed plugin does not detect a heartbleed vuln. correctly.

example site: ascn.papasg.com

image

@nabla-c0d3
Copy link
Owner

Thanks - this was a timing issue.

@aronmolnar
Copy link

This is unfortunately again an issue.
Heartbleed and ccs injection are not detected correctly in version 2.0.6.

I can privatly share a vulnerable system with you if needed.

@nabla-c0d3
Copy link
Owner

@al3xdelarge can you send it to my email address (on my GH profile)? Thanks!

@nabla-c0d3 nabla-c0d3 reopened this Apr 27, 2019
@nabla-c0d3 nabla-c0d3 added the bug label Apr 27, 2019
@aronmolnar
Copy link

Just sent it. Thank you!

@nabla-c0d3
Copy link
Owner

@al3xdelarge I finally looked into it. This was due to the server's TLS stack not supporting the Server Name Indication extension (or just rejecting any name sent via SNI).

Since SSLyze always sends the SNI extension, the server was always returning a TLS Alert 112 "unrecognized_name" (ie. rejecting the SNI extension's value), ending the TLS handshake before SSLyze could test for Heartbleed and CCS.

The fix I just committed was to remove the SNI extension from all checks (including Heartbleed and CCS) except the certificate_info check which requires it. With this changes, SSLyze correctly flags the server you sent me as vulnerable.

@nabla-c0d3
Copy link
Owner

Fixed in v3.0.3.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants