Cyber Resilience

CVE-2021-3711

Memory Safety in Oracle Peoplesoft Enterprise Peopletools 8.57 … 8.59

High EPSSMemory Safety
Published
24 August 2021
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.88 99.7th percentile
Risk Priority 97 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2021-3711 is a critical-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Oracle Peoplesoft Enterprise Peopletools. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, ranked in the top 0.3% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In order to decrypt SM2 encrypted data an application is expected to call the API function EVP_PKEY_decrypt(). Typically an application will call this function twice. The first time, on entry, the "out" parameter can be NULL and, on exit, the…

more

"outlen" parameter is populated with the buffer size required to hold the decrypted plaintext. The application can then allocate a sufficiently sized buffer and call EVP_PKEY_decrypt() again, but this time passing a non-NULL value for the "out" parameter. A bug in the implementation of the SM2 decryption code means that the calculation of the buffer size required to hold the plaintext returned by the first call to EVP_PKEY_decrypt() can be smaller than the actual size required by the second call. This can lead to a buffer overflow when EVP_PKEY_decrypt() is called by the application a second time with a buffer that is too small. A malicious attacker who is able present SM2 content for decryption to an application could cause attacker chosen data to overflow the buffer by up to a maximum of 62 bytes altering the contents of other data held after the buffer, possibly changing application behaviour or causing the application to crash. The location of the buffer is application dependent but is typically heap allocated. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1l (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1k).

CWE(s)

Related Threats

Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI

Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.

T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Executionconfidence: HIGH
Buffer overflow via malformed SM2 ciphertext enables client-side code execution when the victim application decrypts attacker-supplied data.
inferred from description + CWE · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2020-11984Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-52533Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2020-8625Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-0725Same product class: NAS / storage appliance
CVE-2019-12257Same product: Netapp E-Series Santricity Os Controller
CVE-2019-12255Same product: Netapp E-Series Santricity Os Controller
CVE-2022-1292Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-21085Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-21012Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-21011Same product: Debian Debian Linux

Affected Assets

openssl
openssl
1.1.1 — 1.1.1l
debian
debian linux
10.0, 11.0
netapp
active iq unified manager
all versions
netapp
clustered data ontap
all versions
netapp
clustered data ontap antivirus connector
all versions
netapp
e-series santricity os controller
11.0 — 11.50.2
netapp
hci management node
all versions
netapp
manageability software development kit
all versions
netapp
oncommand insight
all versions
netapp
oncommand workflow automation
all versions
+21 more product configuration(s) — see NVD for full list

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V5.2.1

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

addresses: CWE-120

Platform-independent managed code eliminates the need for unchecked native buffer copies that are the root cause of classic buffer overflows.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

prevents

Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.

detects

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.

References