rpm-ostree-client: fails to check gpg package signatures when layering
Published Jul 27, 2018
5.3
MEDIUMCVSS 3.0
EPSS 1.01%
Description
It was discovered that rpm-ostree and rpm-ostree-client before 2017.3 fail to properly check GPG signatures on packages when doing layering. Packages with unsigned or badly signed content could fail to be rejected as expected. This issue is partially mitigated on RHEL Atomic Host, where certificate pinning is used by default.
Affected products
-
- Version 2017.3StatusaffectedConstraints-
- Version
Default status is the baseline for the product, each version can override it (e.g. patched versions marked unaffected).
| Vendor | Product | Default status | Versions | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project Atomic | Rpm-Ostree, | n/a |
|
Configuration 1
- < 2017.3
- < 2017.3
Configuration 2
- 7.0
No data.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host 7
rpm-ostree-0:2017.1-5.atomic.el7
Fixed · RHSA-2017:0444
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host 7
rpm-ostree-client-0:2017.1-6.atomic.el7
Fixed · RHSA-2017:0444
| Product | Package | State | Advisory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host 7 | rpm-ostree-0:2017.1-5.atomic.el7 | Fixed | RHSA-2017:0444 |
| Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host 7 | rpm-ostree-client-0:2017.1-6.atomic.el7 | Fixed | RHSA-2017:0444 |
No package ranges for this CVE.
Remediation
Red Hat mitigation
This issue is partially mitigated on RHEL Atomic Host, where default certificate pinning ensures provenance.
Metrics
No CVSS v4.0 score for this CVE.
No CVSS v3.1 score for this CVE.
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
This CVE is not in the KEV list.
No CISA SSVC assessment for this CVE yet.
Estimated probability of exploitation in the wild in the next 30 days (FIRST EPSS). As of Oct 2, 2026.
Score over time
2021–2026- EPSS v1
- EPSS v5
- EPSS v2
- EPSS v3
Percentile over time
- EPSS v1
- EPSS v5
- EPSS v2
- EPSS v3
Table of values (9 key points)
Flat stretches are collapsed; showing up to 120 newest points.
| Date | Score | Percentile | Model |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2026 | 1.01% (0.01013) | 61.96th | v5 (v2026.06.15) |
| Sep 20, 2026 | 1.03% (0.01026) | 62.09th | v5 (v2026.06.15) |
| Jul 20, 2024 | 0.19% (0.00186) | 56.23th | v3 (v2023.03.01) |
| Dec 18, 2023 | 0.19% (0.00186) | 55.78th | v3 (v2023.03.01) |
| Mar 7, 2023 | 0.20% (0.00203) | 56.48th | v3 (v2023.03.01) |
| Mar 6, 2023 | 0.95% (0.00954) | 36.37th | v2 (v2022.01.01) |
| Feb 4, 2022 | 0.95% (0.00954) | 16.28th | v2 (v2022.01.01) |
| Feb 3, 2022 | 0.83% (0.00833) | 24.58th | v5 (v2026.06.15) |
| Apr 14, 2021 | 0.83% (0.00833) | 0.00th | v1 |
References (7)
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/96558 vdb-entryx_refsource_BIDThird Party AdvisoryVDB Entry
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0444 vendor-advisoryx_refsource_REDHATThird Party Advisory
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-2623 Vendor Advisory
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422157 Issue Tracking
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2017-2623 x_refsource_CONFIRMIssue TrackingThird Party Advisory
- https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-2623
- https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2017-2623
| Link | Providers | Tags |
|---|---|---|
| http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/96558 | vdb-entryx_refsource_BIDThird Party AdvisoryVDB Entry | |
| https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:0444 | vendor-advisoryx_refsource_REDHATThird Party Advisory | |
| https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-2623 | Vendor Advisory | |
| https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422157 | Issue Tracking | |
| https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2017-2623 | x_refsource_CONFIRMIssue TrackingThird Party Advisory | |
| https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-2623 | ||
| https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2017-2623 |
Change history (0)
No recorded changes yet.