Cisco IOS software 11.3 through 12.2 running on Cisco uBR7200 and uBR7100 series Universal Broadband Routers allows remote attackers to modify Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) settings via a DOCSIS file without a Message Integrity Check (MIC) signature, which is approved by the router.

Enigmail before 2.0.11 allows PGP signature spoofing: for an inline PGP message, an attacker can cause the product to display a "correctly signed" message indication, but display different unauthenticated text.

In verify_signed_hash() in lib/liboswkeys/signatures.c in Openswan before 2.6.50.1, the RSA implementation does not verify the value of padding string during PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used. IKEv2 signature verification is affected when RAW RSA keys are used.

The signature verification routine in Enigmail before 2.0.7 interprets user ids as status/control messages and does not correctly keep track of the status of multiple signatures, which allows remote attackers to spoof arbitrary email signatures via public keys containing crafted primary user ids.

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to version 1.3.0, RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code does not check for tailing garbage bytes after decoding a `DigestInfo` ASN.1 structure. This can allow padding bytes to be removed and garbage data added to forge a signature when a low public exponent is being used. The issue has been addressed in `node-forge` version 1.3.0. There are currently no known workarounds.

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to version 1.3.0, RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code does not properly check `DigestInfo` for a proper ASN.1 structure. This can lead to successful verification with signatures that contain invalid structures but a valid digest. The issue has been addressed in `node-forge` version 1.3.0. There are currently no known workarounds.

The XmlSecLibs library as used in the saml2 library in SimpleSAMLphp before 1.15.3 incorrectly verifies signatures on SAML assertions, allowing a remote attacker to construct a crafted SAML assertion on behalf of an Identity Provider that would pass as cryptographically valid, thereby allowing them to impersonate a user from that Identity Provider, aka a key confusion issue.

Union Pay up to 1.2.0, for web based versions contains a CWE-347: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature vulnerability, allows attackers to shop for free in merchants' websites and mobile apps, via a crafted authentication code (MAC) which is generated based on a secret key which is NULL.

ecdsautils is a tiny collection of programs used for ECDSA (keygen, sign, verify). `ecdsa_verify_[prepare_]legacy()` does not check whether the signature values `r` and `s` are non-zero. A signature consisting only of zeroes is always considered valid, making it trivial to forge signatures. Requiring multiple signatures from different public keys does not mitigate the issue: `ecdsa_verify_list_legacy()` will accept an arbitrary number of such forged signatures. Both the `ecdsautil verify` CLI command and the libecdsautil library are affected. The issue has been fixed in ecdsautils 0.4.1. All older versions of ecdsautils (including versions before the split into a library and a CLI utility) are vulnerable.

Duo Network Gateway 1.2.9 and earlier may incorrectly utilize the results of XML DOM traversal and canonicalization APIs in such a way that an attacker may be able to manipulate the SAML data without invalidating the cryptographic signature, allowing the attack to potentially bypass authentication to SAML service providers.

Wizkunde SAMLBase may incorrectly utilize the results of XML DOM traversal and canonicalization APIs in such a way that an attacker may be able to manipulate the SAML data without invalidating the cryptographic signature, allowing the attack to potentially bypass authentication to SAML service providers.

Hyperledger Iroha versions v1.0_beta and v1.0.0_beta-1 are vulnerable to transaction and block signature verification bypass in the transaction and block validator allowing a single node to sign a transaction and/or block multiple times, each with a random nonce, and have other validating nodes accept them as separate valid signatures.

Lotus is an Implementation of the Filecoin protocol written in Go. BLS signature validation in lotus uses blst library method VerifyCompressed. This method accepts signatures in 2 forms: "serialized", and "compressed", meaning that BLS signatures can be provided as either of 2 unique byte arrays. Lotus block validation functions perform a uniqueness check on provided blocks. Two blocks are considered distinct if the CIDs of their blockheader do not match. The CID method for blockheader includes the BlockSig of the block. The result of these issues is that it would be possible to punish miners for valid blocks, as there are two different valid block CIDs available for each block, even though this must be unique. By switching from the go based `blst` bindings over to the bindings in `filecoin-ffi`, the code paths now ensure that all signatures are compressed by size and the way they are deserialized. This happened in https://github.com/filecoin-project/lotus/pull/5393.

A wrong generation of the passphrase for the encrypted block in Nextcloud Server 19.0.1 allowed an attacker to overwrite blocks in a file.

Cisco 7940/7960 Voice over IP (VoIP) phones do not properly check the Call-ID, branch, and tag values in a NOTIFY message to verify a subscription, which allows remote attackers to spoof messages such as the "Messages waiting" message.

ServiceStack before 5.9.2 mishandles JWT signature verification unless an application has a custom ValidateToken function that establishes a valid minimum length for a signature.

Nov json-jwt version >= 0.5.0 && < 1.9.4 contains a CWE-347: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature vulnerability in Decryption of AES-GCM encrypted JSON Web Tokens that can result in Attacker can forge a authentication tag. This attack appear to be exploitable via network connectivity. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 1.9.4 and later.

Little Snitch versions 4.0 to 4.0.6 use the SecStaticCodeCheckValidityWithErrors() function without the kSecCSCheckAllArchitectures flag and therefore do not validate all architectures stored in a fat binary. An attacker can maliciously craft a fat binary containing multiple architectures that may cause a situation where Little Snitch treats the running process as having no code signature at all while erroneously indicating that the binary on disk does have a valid code signature. This could lead to users being confused about whether or not the code signature is valid.

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to version 1.3.0, RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code is lenient in checking the digest algorithm structure. This can allow a crafted structure that steals padding bytes and uses unchecked portion of the PKCS#1 encoded message to forge a signature when a low public exponent is being used. The issue has been addressed in `node-forge` version 1.3.0. There are currently no known workarounds.

A vulnerability in the Cisco node-jose open source library before 0.11.0 could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to re-sign tokens using a key that is embedded within the token. The vulnerability is due to node-jose following the JSON Web Signature (JWS) standard for JSON Web Tokens (JWTs). This standard specifies that a JSON Web Key (JWK) representing a public key can be embedded within the header of a JWS. This public key is then trusted for verification. An attacker could exploit this by forging valid JWS objects by removing the original signature, adding a new public key to the header, and then signing the object using the (attacker-owned) private key associated with the public key embedded in that JWS header.

Huawei APP HiWallet earlier than 5.0.3.100 versions do not support signature verification for APK file. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability to hijack the APK and upload modified APK file. Successful exploit could lead to the APP is hijacking.

pass through 1.7.3 has a possibility of using a password for an unintended resource. For exploitation to occur, the user must do a git pull, decrypt a password, and log into a remote service with the password. If an attacker controls the central Git server or one of the other members' machines, and also controls one of the services already in the password store, they can rename one of the password files in the Git repository to something else: pass doesn't correctly verify that the content of a file matches the filename, so a user might be tricked into decrypting the wrong password and sending that to a service that the attacker controls. NOTE: for environments in which this threat model is of concern, signing commits can be a solution.

CodeMeter (All versions prior to 6.90 when using CmActLicense update files with CmActLicense Firm Code) has an issue in the license-file signature checking mechanism, which allows attackers to build arbitrary license files, including forging a valid license file as if it were a valid license file of an existing vendor. Only CmActLicense update files with CmActLicense Firm Code are affected.

Hyperledger Indy Node is the server portion of a distributed ledger purpose-built for decentralized identity. In Hyperledger Indy before version 1.12.4, there is lack of signature verification on a specific transaction which enables an attacker to make certain unauthorized alterations to the ledger. Updating a DID with a nym transaction will be written to the ledger if neither ROLE or VERKEY are being changed, regardless of sender. A malicious DID with no particular role can ask an update for another DID (but cannot modify its verkey or role). This is bad because 1) Any DID can write a nym transaction to the ledger (i.e., any DID can spam the ledger with nym transactions), 2) Any DID can change any other DID's alias, 3) The update transaction modifies the ledger metadata associated with a DID.

In verify_emsa_pkcs1_signature() in gmp_rsa_public_key.c in the gmp plugin in strongSwan 4.x and 5.x before 5.7.0, the RSA implementation based on GMP does not reject excess data after the encoded algorithm OID during PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification. Similar to the flaw in the same version of strongSwan regarding digestAlgorithm.parameters, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation when only an RSA signature is used for IKEv2 authentication.

In verify_emsa_pkcs1_signature() in gmp_rsa_public_key.c in the gmp plugin in strongSwan 4.x and 5.x before 5.7.0, the RSA implementation based on GMP does not reject excess data in the digestAlgorithm.parameters field during PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation when only an RSA signature is used for IKEv2 authentication. This is a variant of CVE-2006-4790 and CVE-2014-1568.

An issue was discovered in the jsrsasign package through 8.0.18 for Node.js. It allows a malleability in ECDSA signatures by not checking overflows in the length of a sequence and '0' characters appended or prepended to an integer. The modified signatures are verified as valid. This could have a security-relevant impact if an application relied on a single canonical signature.

LibreOffice supports digital signatures of ODF documents and macros within documents, presenting visual aids that no alteration of the document occurred since the last signing and that the signature is valid. An Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in LibreOffice allowed an attacker to create a digitally signed ODF document, by manipulating the documentsignatures.xml or macrosignatures.xml stream within the document to contain both "X509Data" and "KeyValue" children of the "KeyInfo" tag, which when opened caused LibreOffice to verify using the "KeyValue" but to report verification with the unrelated "X509Data" value. This issue affects: The Document Foundation LibreOffice 7.2 versions prior to 7.2.5.

Improper Verification of a Cryptographic Signature in OpenPGP.js <=4.1.2 allows an attacker to pass off unsigned data as signed.