CVE-2024-36405
Openquantumsafe Liboqs ≤ 0.10.1
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-36405 is a medium-severity Observable Timing Discrepancy (CWE-208) vulnerability in Openquantumsafe Liboqs. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Password Guessing (T1110.001); ranked at the 41th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SC-31 (Covert Channel Analysis) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-36062
Vulnerability Data
liboqs is a C-language cryptographic library that provides implementations of post-quantum cryptography algorithms. A control-flow timing lean has been identified in the reference implementation of the Kyber key encapsulation mechanism when it is compiled with Clang 15-18 for `-Os`, `-O1`,…
more
and other compilation options. A proof-of-concept local attack on the reference implementation leaks the entire ML-KEM 512 secret key in ~10 minutes using end-to-end decapsulation timing measurements. The issue has been fixed in version 0.10.1. As a possible workaround, some compiler options may produce vectorized code that does not leak secret information, however relying on these compiler options as a workaround may not be reliable.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V11.2.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing can include timing analysis or side-channel test cases that reveal observable timing discrepancies.
Covert channel analysis directly identifies timing channels that could leak information.
Engineering principles can mandate constant-time algorithms and side-channel resistance so timing discrepancies are never introduced.
Requiring approved cryptographic modules and algorithms implicitly demands implementations free of observable timing leaks.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require constant-time implementations that eliminate observable timing discrepancies.
Runtime monitoring of hardware/software behavior can detect anomalous timing patterns that indicate covert channels.
Vulnerability identification processes can surface timing-channel weaknesses during design or code analysis.
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.
Detailed logging can reveal timing anomalies but does not prevent covert timing channels.
Continuous monitoring may detect timing-based exfiltration but does not eliminate the channel itself.
Network segmentation reduces attack surface but does not address intra-process timing channels.
Network segregation limits external timing observation but not internal covert timing.
Secure architecture principles can include timing-channel countermeasures but are not specific.
Secure coding guidelines may recommend constant-time algorithms but coverage is not guaranteed.