Dogtag Certificate SystemApplication · Redhat
CVE-2008-5082
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe verifyProof function in the Token Processing System (TPS) component in Red Hat Certificate System (RHCS) 7.1 through 7.3 and Dogtag Certificate System 1.0 returns successfully even when token enrollment did not use the hardware key, which allows remote authenticated users with enrollment privileges to bypass intended authentication policies by performing enrollment with a software key.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe verifyProof function in the Token Processing System (TPS) component of Red Hat Certificate System 7.1-7.3 and Dogtag Certificate System 1.0 fails to properly validate that token enrollment used the required hardware key, instead returning success even when a software key was used. This allows authenticated users with enrollment privileges to bypass hardware-based authentication policies.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Dogtag Certificate SystemApplication
= 1.0
Certificate SystemApplication
= 7.1= 7.2= 7.3CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed Certificate System product and versionQuery the system for Red Hat Certificate System or Dogtag Certificate System packages and their version numbers (e.g., rpm -q redhat-cert-system or dogtag-cert-system, or list installed CA subsystem packages)Affected if The installed version is 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, or 1.0
-
Verify if Token Processing System (TPS) component is enabledExamine the Certificate System configuration to determine whether the TPS subsystem is installed and active (check for TPS-related processes, services, or configuration directories)Affected if TPS component is enabled and the version falls within the affected range
-
Check if hardware key authentication policies are configuredReview TPS configuration files and authentication policy settings to determine whether hardware-based key verification is defined as a requirement for token enrollment operationsAffected if Hardware key authentication is configured as a required policy for enrollment
-
Review enrollment privilege assignmentsExamine user accounts and their enrollment privileges within the Certificate System to identify which authenticated users can perform token enrollment operationsAffected if Users with enrollment privileges exist in the system
A user is affected if running an affected version (7.1, 7.2, 7.3, or 1.0) with TPS enabled and hardware key authentication policies configured, because the verifyProof flaw allows bypassing those hardware key requirements.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to a patched version of the Certificate System. If running legacy systems that cannot be upgraded, restrict enrollment privileges to only trusted users and implement additional manual verification controls for token enrollment requests.
Fix this in Dogtag Certificate System
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-5082 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-5082 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data