CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2016-9583

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Aug 01, 2018 | Modified: Nov 07, 2023
CVSS 3.x
7.8
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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
5.5 LOW
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

An out-of-bounds heap read vulnerability was found in the jpc_pi_nextpcrl() function of jasper before 2.0.6 when processing crafted input.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Enterprise_linux_desktop Redhat 6.0 (including) 6.0 (including)
Enterprise_linux_desktop Redhat 7.0 (including) 7.0 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server Redhat 6.0 (including) 6.0 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server Redhat 7.0 (including) 7.0 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_aus Redhat 7.3 (including) 7.3 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_aus Redhat 7.4 (including) 7.4 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_aus Redhat 7.6 (including) 7.6 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_eus Redhat 7.3 (including) 7.3 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_eus Redhat 7.4 (including) 7.4 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_eus Redhat 7.5 (including) 7.5 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_eus Redhat 7.6 (including) 7.6 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_tus Redhat 7.3 (including) 7.3 (including)
Enterprise_linux_server_tus Redhat 7.6 (including) 7.6 (including)
Enterprise_linux_workstation Redhat 6.0 (including) 6.0 (including)
Enterprise_linux_workstation Redhat 7.0 (including) 7.0 (including)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat jasper-0:1.900.1-21.el6_9 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat jasper-0:1.900.1-30.el7_3 *
Jasper Ubuntu vivid/stable-phone-overlay *

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