CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2017-16909

Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

Published: Dec 07, 2018 | Modified: Dec 28, 2018
CVSS 3.x
8.8
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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
RedHat/V3
3.3 LOW
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Ubuntu
LOW

An error related to the LibRaw::panasonic_load_raw() function (dcraw_common.cpp) in LibRaw versions prior to 0.18.6 can be exploited to cause a heap-based buffer overflow and subsequently cause a crash via a specially crafted TIFF image.

Weakness

The product 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.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Libraw Libraw * 0.18.6 (excluding)
Darktable Ubuntu artful *
Darktable Ubuntu bionic *
Darktable Ubuntu cosmic *
Darktable Ubuntu disco *
Darktable Ubuntu eoan *
Darktable Ubuntu groovy *
Darktable Ubuntu hirsute *
Darktable Ubuntu impish *
Darktable Ubuntu kinetic *
Darktable Ubuntu lunar *
Darktable Ubuntu mantic *
Darktable Ubuntu trusty *
Darktable Ubuntu xenial *
Darktable Ubuntu zesty *
Dcraw Ubuntu artful *
Dcraw Ubuntu bionic *
Dcraw Ubuntu cosmic *
Dcraw Ubuntu disco *
Dcraw Ubuntu eoan *
Dcraw Ubuntu groovy *
Dcraw Ubuntu hirsute *
Dcraw Ubuntu impish *
Dcraw Ubuntu kinetic *
Dcraw Ubuntu lunar *
Dcraw Ubuntu mantic *
Dcraw Ubuntu trusty *
Dcraw Ubuntu xenial *
Dcraw Ubuntu zesty *
Exactimage Ubuntu artful *
Exactimage Ubuntu bionic *
Exactimage Ubuntu cosmic *
Exactimage Ubuntu devel *
Exactimage Ubuntu disco *
Exactimage Ubuntu eoan *
Exactimage Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Exactimage Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Exactimage Ubuntu esm-apps/jammy *
Exactimage Ubuntu esm-apps/noble *
Exactimage Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Exactimage Ubuntu focal *
Exactimage Ubuntu groovy *
Exactimage Ubuntu hirsute *
Exactimage Ubuntu impish *
Exactimage Ubuntu jammy *
Exactimage Ubuntu kinetic *
Exactimage Ubuntu lunar *
Exactimage Ubuntu mantic *
Exactimage Ubuntu noble *
Exactimage Ubuntu trusty *
Exactimage Ubuntu upstream *
Exactimage Ubuntu xenial *
Exactimage Ubuntu zesty *
Kodi Ubuntu artful *
Kodi Ubuntu bionic *
Kodi Ubuntu cosmic *
Kodi Ubuntu disco *
Kodi Ubuntu eoan *
Kodi Ubuntu groovy *
Kodi Ubuntu hirsute *
Kodi Ubuntu impish *
Kodi Ubuntu kinetic *
Kodi Ubuntu lunar *
Kodi Ubuntu mantic *
Kodi Ubuntu xenial *
Kodi Ubuntu zesty *
Libraw Ubuntu artful *
Libraw Ubuntu trusty *
Libraw Ubuntu xenial *
Libraw Ubuntu zesty *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu artful *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu bionic *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu cosmic *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu disco *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu eoan *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu groovy *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu hirsute *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu impish *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu kinetic *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu lunar *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu mantic *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu trusty *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu xenial *
Rawtherapee Ubuntu zesty *
Ufraw Ubuntu artful *
Ufraw Ubuntu bionic *
Ufraw Ubuntu cosmic *
Ufraw Ubuntu disco *
Ufraw Ubuntu trusty *
Ufraw Ubuntu xenial *
Ufraw Ubuntu zesty *
Xbmc Ubuntu trusty *

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.

  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.

  • D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.

  • 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]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as “rebasing” (for Windows) and “prelinking” (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

  • Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].

References