GnutlsApplication · Gnu

CVE-2018-16868

MEDIUM · 5.6 CVSS v3.1 Published 2018-12-03
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 3.6.4 or later.
See remediation →
58/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Zero-click

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 · unedited
A Bleichenbacher type side-channel based padding oracle attack was found in the way gnutls handles verification of RSA decrypted PKCS#1 v1.5 data. An attacker who is able to run process on the same physical core as the victim process, could use this to extract plaintext or in some cases downgrade any TLS connections to a vulnerable server.

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 · moderate confidence

A Bleichenbacher-type padding oracle vulnerability in GnuTLS allows an attacker with local code execution on the same physical CPU core as the victim process to extract plaintext from RSA-decrypted PKCS#1 v1.5 data by observing timing side-channels during padding verification, potentially enabling TLS connection downgrades.

MitigationUpdate GnuTLS to a patched version. Additionally, disable RSA key exchange and prefer ECDHE cipher suites to eliminate reliance on vulnerable RSA decryption, and consider physical isolation or CPU affinity controls to prevent co-location attacks.

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
GnutlsApplication
Affected:<= 3.6.4

CVSS 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
Physical
Complexity
High
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed GnuTLS version
    Run 'gnutls-cli --version' or 'gnutls-serv --version' from the command line, or query your package manager (e.g., 'dpkg -l | grep gnutls' on Debian/Ubuntu, 'rpm -qa | grep gnutls' on RHEL/CentOS)
    Affected if The version reported is 3.6.4 or lower
  2. Determine if RSA key exchange is in use
    Review your TLS server configuration files (e.g., /etc/gnutls/config, nginx/apache config if using GnuTLS) and check which cipher suites are enabled, specifically looking for 'RSA' or 'RSA-*' cipher suite definitions
    Affected if RSA-based cipher suites (key exchange mechanisms using RSA decryption) are enabled in the TLS configuration
  3. Verify TLS connections use RSA key exchange
    Use a TLS scanning tool such as 'gnutls-cli' or 'openssl s_client' to connect to your TLS services and inspect the negotiated cipher suite, or examine TLS handshake logs for the key exchange method
    Affected if Connections are establishing with RSA key exchange (cipher suites like TLS_RSA_*); ECDHE and other forward-secret key exchanges are not affected by this specific oracle
  4. Assess local attack surface
    Determine if untrusted local processes could share CPU cores with your GnuTLS processes by checking CPU affinity settings (e.g., 'taskset -pc <pid>' for running processes) or examining container/sandbox isolation configurations
    Affected if GnuTLS processes handling RSA-decrypted TLS traffic share CPU cores with other local processes without proper isolation

You are affected if running GnuTLS version 3.6.4 or lower with RSA key exchange enabled and TLS connections using RSA key exchange are being handled by processes vulnerable to local timing observation.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 3.6.4
Interim mitigation

Update GnuTLS to a patched version. Additionally, disable RSA key exchange and prefer ECDHE cipher suites to eliminate reliance on vulnerable RSA decryption, and consider physical isolation or CPU affinity controls to prevent co-location attacks.

Fix this in Gnutls Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,060
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,896.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-16868 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-16868 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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