CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2014-9669

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Feb 08, 2015 | Modified: Oct 30, 2018
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
6.8 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
4.3 LOW
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

Multiple integer overflows in sfnt/ttcmap.c in FreeType before 2.5.4 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read or memory corruption) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted cmap SFNT table.

Weakness

The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Ubuntu_linux Canonical 10.04 (including) 10.04 (including)
Ubuntu_linux Canonical 12.04 (including) 12.04 (including)
Ubuntu_linux Canonical 14.04 (including) 14.04 (including)
Ubuntu_linux Canonical 14.10 (including) 14.10 (including)
Ubuntu_linux Canonical 15.04 (including) 15.04 (including)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat freetype-0:2.3.11-15.el6_6.1 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat freetype-0:2.4.11-10.el7_1.1 *
Freetype Ubuntu devel *
Freetype Ubuntu lucid *
Freetype Ubuntu precise *
Freetype Ubuntu trusty *
Freetype Ubuntu upstream *
Freetype Ubuntu utopic *

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.

References