{"id":2373,"date":"2005-07-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-07-13T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2005\/07\/13\/security-authentication-system-kerberos-flaws\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:41:11","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:41:11","slug":"security-authentication-system-kerberos-flaws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2005\/07\/13\/security-authentication-system-kerberos-flaws\/","title":{"rendered":"Security authentication system Kerberos flaws"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has issued patches for three serious flaws in Kerberos v5, a widely used security authentication system.  The worst of the flaws could allow an attacker to gain access to an entire authentication realm, according to MIT.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>One of these, a boundary error that can cause a heap-based buffer overflow via a TCP or UDP request, may be used to execute malicious code on a system; MIT warned a successful attack could allow access to the entire authentication realm protected by the KDC.<\/p>\n<p>Two of the flaws affect the Key Distribution Center (KDC), which authenticates users. One of these, a boundary error that can cause a heap-based buffer overflow via a TCP or UDP request, may be used to execute malicious code on a system<\/p>\n<p>A third flaw, affecting the krb5_recvauth() function, could allow a remote attacker to take over a system.  However, the but is a double-free error, where a program attempts to free memory that&#8217;s already been freed.  &#8220;Exploitation of double-free vulnerabilities is believed to be difficult,&#8221; MIT said in its advisory.<\/p>\n<p>[Editors note:  Microsoft&#8217;s implementation of Kerberos should not be affected since they coded their particular implementation internally]<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.xatrix.org\/article3963.html<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2373","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-warnings"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2373","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2373"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2373\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4860,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2373\/revisions\/4860"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2373"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2373"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2373"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}