CVE-2018-11070
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 · uneditedRSA BSAFE Crypto-J versions prior to 6.2.4 and RSA BSAFE SSL-J versions prior to 6.2.4 contain a Covert Timing Channel vulnerability during PKCS #1 unpadding operations, also known as a Bleichenbacher attack. A remote attacker may be able to recover a RSA 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 confidenceThis is a Bleichenbacher timing side-channel vulnerability in RSA BSAFE Crypto-J and SSL-J libraries. During PKCS#1 unpadding operations, the library exhibits timing differences that allow a remote attacker to perform adaptive chosen-ciphertext attacks and eventually recover the RSA private key by measuring server response times.
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< 6.2.4< 6.2.4CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 RSA BSAFE libraries in useSearch for BSAFE library files in the application deployment: look for jar files named 'bsafe-crypto-j*.jar', 'bsafe-ssl-j*.jar', 'cryptoj*.jar', or 'ssljsse*.jar' in lib/application directories, or inspect loaded classes containing 'com.rsa.*' or 'com.bsafe.*' packagesAffected if Either Dell Bsafe Crypto J or Dell Rsa Bsafe Ssl J libraries are present in the runtime environment
-
Determine library versionInspect the library jar manifest files or class metadata for version information; check product documentation or build artifacts referencing the BSAFE librariesAffected if The installed version is lower than 6.2.4 for either Crypto-J or SSL-J
-
Verify RSA key exchange is enabledInspect TLS/SSL configuration files or code that configures the SSLContext/KeyManager; look for enabled cipher suites containing 'RSA' key exchange such as TLS_RSA_WITH_* ciphersAffected if TLS configuration allows RSA key exchange cipher suites (e.g., TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA)
-
Check if server processes RSA-encrypted TLS handshakeEnable TLS handshake debugging (e.g., -Djavax.net.debug=ssl:handshake) and observe if the server accepts and processes ClientKeyExchange messages containing RSA-encrypted pre-master secretsAffected if Server responds to RSA-encrypted handshake messages without immediate rejection
A user is affected if their environment contains Dell BSAFE Crypto-J or SSL-J versions prior to 6.2.4 with RSA key exchange cipher suites enabled in TLS configuration.
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 data6.2.4
Upgrade RSA BSAFE Crypto-J to version 6.2.4 or later, and RSA BSAFE SSL-J to version 6.2.4 or later. Alternatively, implement TLS-level mitigations such as disabling RSA key exchange or adding random delays to obscure timing differences.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing16.0 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 $8,576.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-11070 — 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-2018-11070 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