CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2017-15337

Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

Published: Feb 15, 2018 | Modified: Feb 27, 2018
CVSS 3.x
3.7
LOW
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS 2.x
4.3 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

The SIP module in Huawei DP300 V500R002C00, IPS Module V100R001C10, V100R001C20, V100R001C30, V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, V500R001C50, NGFW Module V100R001C10, V100R001C20, V100R001C30, V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R002C00, V500R002C10, NIP6300 V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, V500R001C50, NIP6600 V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, V500R001C50, NIP6800 V500R001C50, RP200 V500R002C00, V600R006C00, SVN5600 V200R003C00, V200R003C10, SVN5800 V200R003C00, V200R003C10, SVN5800-C V200R003C00, V200R003C10, SeMG9811 V300R001C01, Secospace USG6300 V100R001C10, V100R001C20, V100R001C30, V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, V500R001C50, Secospace USG6500 V100R001C10, V100R001C20, V100R001C30, V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, V500R001C50, Secospace USG6600 V100R001C00, V100R001C20, V100R001C30, V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, V500R001C50, TE30 V100R001C02, V100R001C10, V500R002C00, V600R006C00, TE40 V500R002C00, V600R006C00, TE50 V500R002C00, V600R006C00, TE60 V100R001C01, V100R001C10, V500R002C00, V600R006C00, USG9500 V500R001C00, V500R001C20, V500R001C30, USG9520 V300R001C01, V300R001C20, USG9560 V300R001C01, V300R001C20, USG9580 V300R001C01, V300R001C20, VP9660 V200R001C02, V200R001C30, V500R002C00, V500R002C10, ViewPoint 8660 V100R008C03, ViewPoint 9030 V100R011C02, V100R011C03, eSpace U1981 V100R001C20, V200R003C00, V200R003C20, V200R003C30 has a buffer overflow vulnerability. An attacker would have to find a way to craft specific messages to the affected products. Due to the insufficient validation for SIP messages, successful exploit may cause services abnormal.

Weakness

The software performs operations on a memory buffer, but it can read from or write to a memory location that is outside of the intended boundary of the buffer.

Extended Description

Certain languages allow direct addressing of memory locations and do not automatically ensure that these locations are valid for the memory buffer that is being referenced. This can cause read or write operations to be performed on memory locations that may be associated with other variables, data structures, or internal program data. As a result, an attacker may be able to execute arbitrary code, alter the intended control flow, read sensitive information, or cause the system to crash.

Potential Mitigations

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

  • Be wary that a language’s interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that automatically provide a protection mechanism that mitigates or eliminates buffer overflows.

  • For example, certain compilers and extensions provide automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are built into the compiled code. Examples include the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice.

  • Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application’s memory:

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.

  • Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64].

References