The qemu implementation in libvirt before 1.3.0 and Xen allows local guest OS users to cause a denial of service (host disk consumption) by writing to stdout or stderr.
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Libvirt | Redhat | * | 1.2.21 (including) |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | esm-infra-legacy/trusty | * |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | precise/esm | * |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | trusty/esm | * |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | upstream | * |
| Libvirt | Ubuntu | wily | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | artful | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | devel | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | esm-infra-legacy/trusty | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | esm-infra/xenial | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | trusty/esm | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | wily | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | yakkety | * |
| Qemu | Ubuntu | zesty | * |
| Qemu-kvm | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Qemu-kvm | Ubuntu | precise/esm | * |
| Xen | Ubuntu | precise | * |
| Xen | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:
The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.
The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.