{"api_version":"1","generated_at":"2026-07-23T10:30:12+00:00","cve":"CVE-2017-5999","urls":{"html":"https://cve.report/CVE-2017-5999","api":"https://cve.report/api/cve/CVE-2017-5999.json","docs":"https://cve.report/api","cve_org":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2017-5999","nvd":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-5999"},"summary":{"title":"CVE-2017-5999","description":"An issue was discovered in sysPass 2.x before 2.1, in which an algorithm was never sufficiently reviewed by cryptographers. The fact that inc/SP/Core/Crypt.class is using the MCRYPT_RIJNDAEL_256() function (the 256-bit block version of Rijndael, not AES) instead of MCRYPT_RIJNDAEL_128 (real AES) could help an attacker to create unknown havoc in the remote system.","state":"PUBLIC","assigner":"cve@mitre.org","published_at":"2017-03-06 06:59:00","updated_at":"2017-03-15 18:42:00"},"problem_types":["CWE-326"],"metrics":[],"references":[{"url":"https://cxsecurity.com/issue/WLB-2017020196","name":"https://cxsecurity.com/issue/WLB-2017020196","refsource":"MISC","tags":["Third Party Advisory"],"title":"sysPass 2.0 risky cryptographic algorithm usage - CXSecurity.com","mime":"text/html","httpstatus":"200","archivestatus":"200"},{"url":"http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/96562","name":"96562","refsource":"BID","tags":["Third Party Advisory","VDB Entry"],"title":"sysPass CVE-2017-5999 Cryptographic Security Bypass Vulnerability","mime":"text/html","httpstatus":"200","archivestatus":"0"},{"url":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/releases/tag/2.1.0.17022601","name":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/releases/tag/2.1.0.17022601","refsource":"CONFIRM","tags":["Patch","Release Notes"],"title":"Release sysPass 2.1 · nuxsmin/sysPass · GitHub","mime":"text/html","httpstatus":"200","archivestatus":"200"},{"url":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/commit/a0e2c485e53b370a7cc6d833e192c3c5bfd70e1f","name":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/commit/a0e2c485e53b370a7cc6d833e192c3c5bfd70e1f","refsource":"CONFIRM","tags":["Patch"],"title":"Merge branch 'crypt' · nuxsmin/sysPass@a0e2c48 · GitHub","mime":"text/html","httpstatus":"200","archivestatus":"200"},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2017-5999","name":"CVE Program record","refsource":"CVE.ORG","tags":["canonical"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-5999","name":"NVD vulnerability detail","refsource":"NVD","tags":["canonical","analysis"]}],"affected":[],"timeline":[],"solutions":[],"workarounds":[],"exploits":[],"credits":[],"nvd_cpes":[{"cve_year":"2017","cve_id":"5999","vulnerable":"1","versionEndIncluding":"","cpe1":"cpe","cpe2":"2.3","cpe3":"a","cpe4":"syspass","cpe5":"syspass","cpe6":"2.0","cpe7":"*","cpe8":"*","cpe9":"*","cpe10":"*","cpe11":"*","cpe12":"*","cpe13":"*"},{"cve_year":"2017","cve_id":"5999","vulnerable":"1","versionEndIncluding":"1","cpe1":"cpe","cpe2":"2.3","cpe3":"a","cpe4":"syspass","cpe5":"syspass","cpe6":"2.0","cpe7":"*","cpe8":"*","cpe9":"*","cpe10":"*","cpe11":"*","cpe12":"*","cpe13":"*"}],"vendor_comments":[],"enrichments":{"kev":null,"epss":null,"legacy_qids":[]},"source_records":{"cve_program":{"CVE_data_meta":{"ASSIGNER":"cve@mitre.org","ID":"CVE-2017-5999","STATE":"PUBLIC"},"affects":{"vendor":{"vendor_data":[{"product":{"product_data":[{"product_name":"n/a","version":{"version_data":[{"version_value":"n/a"}]}}]},"vendor_name":"n/a"}]}},"data_format":"MITRE","data_type":"CVE","data_version":"4.0","description":{"description_data":[{"lang":"eng","value":"An issue was discovered in sysPass 2.x before 2.1, in which an algorithm was never sufficiently reviewed by cryptographers. The fact that inc/SP/Core/Crypt.class is using the MCRYPT_RIJNDAEL_256() function (the 256-bit block version of Rijndael, not AES) instead of MCRYPT_RIJNDAEL_128 (real AES) could help an attacker to create unknown havoc in the remote system."}]},"problemtype":{"problemtype_data":[{"description":[{"lang":"eng","value":"n/a"}]}]},"references":{"reference_data":[{"name":"https://cxsecurity.com/issue/WLB-2017020196","refsource":"MISC","url":"https://cxsecurity.com/issue/WLB-2017020196"},{"name":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/commit/a0e2c485e53b370a7cc6d833e192c3c5bfd70e1f","refsource":"CONFIRM","url":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/commit/a0e2c485e53b370a7cc6d833e192c3c5bfd70e1f"},{"name":"96562","refsource":"BID","url":"http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/96562"},{"name":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/releases/tag/2.1.0.17022601","refsource":"CONFIRM","url":"https://github.com/nuxsmin/sysPass/releases/tag/2.1.0.17022601"}]}},"nvd":{"publishedDate":"2017-03-06 06:59:00","lastModifiedDate":"2017-03-15 18:42:00","problem_types":["CWE-326"],"metrics":{"baseMetricV3":{"cvssV3":{"version":"3.0","vectorString":"CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N","attackVector":"NETWORK","attackComplexity":"LOW","privilegesRequired":"NONE","userInteraction":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","confidentialityImpact":"HIGH","integrityImpact":"NONE","availabilityImpact":"NONE","baseScore":7.5,"baseSeverity":"HIGH"},"exploitabilityScore":3.9,"impactScore":3.6},"baseMetricV2":{"cvssV2":{"version":"2.0","vectorString":"AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N","accessVector":"NETWORK","accessComplexity":"LOW","authentication":"NONE","confidentialityImpact":"PARTIAL","integrityImpact":"NONE","availabilityImpact":"NONE","baseScore":5},"severity":"MEDIUM","exploitabilityScore":10,"impactScore":2.9,"obtainAllPrivilege":false,"obtainUserPrivilege":false,"obtainOtherPrivilege":false,"userInteractionRequired":false}},"configurations":{"CVE_data_version":"4.0","nodes":[{"operator":"OR","children":[],"cpe_match":[{"vulnerable":true,"cpe23Uri":"cpe:2.3:a:syspass:syspass:2.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*","cpe_name":[]}]}]}},"legacy_mitre":{"record":{"CveYear":"2017","CveId":"5999","Ordinal":"102621","Title":"CVE-2017-5999","CVE":"CVE-2017-5999","Year":"2017"},"notes":[{"CveYear":"2017","CveId":"5999","Ordinal":"1","NoteData":"An issue was discovered in sysPass 2.x before 2.1, in which an algorithm was never sufficiently reviewed by cryptographers. The fact that inc/SP/Core/Crypt.class is using the MCRYPT_RIJNDAEL_256() function (the 256-bit block version of Rijndael, not AES) instead of MCRYPT_RIJNDAEL_128 (real AES) could help an attacker to create unknown havoc in the remote system.","Type":"Description","Title":null},{"CveYear":"2017","CveId":"5999","Ordinal":"2","NoteData":"2017-03-06","Type":"Other","Title":"Published"},{"CveYear":"2017","CveId":"5999","Ordinal":"3","NoteData":"2017-03-07","Type":"Other","Title":"Modified"}]}}}