CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2018-12393

Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Published: Feb 28, 2019 | Modified: Aug 24, 2020
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
5 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.5 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

A potential vulnerability was found in 32-bit builds where an integer overflow during the conversion of scripts to an internal UTF-16 representation could result in allocating a buffer too small for the conversion. This leads to a possible out-of-bounds write. Note: 64-bit builds are not vulnerable to this issue.. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 63, Firefox ESR < 60.3, and Thunderbird < 60.3.

Weakness

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound, when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This can introduce other weaknesses when the calculation is used for resource management or execution control.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Firefox Mozilla * 63.0 (excluding)
Firefox_esr Mozilla * 60.3 (excluding)
Thunderbird Mozilla * 60.3 (excluding)
Firefox Ubuntu bionic *
Firefox Ubuntu cosmic *
Firefox Ubuntu devel *
Firefox Ubuntu disco *
Firefox Ubuntu eoan *
Firefox Ubuntu focal *
Firefox Ubuntu groovy *
Firefox Ubuntu hirsute *
Firefox Ubuntu impish *
Firefox Ubuntu jammy *
Firefox Ubuntu kinetic *
Firefox Ubuntu lunar *
Firefox Ubuntu mantic *
Firefox Ubuntu noble *
Firefox Ubuntu trusty *
Firefox Ubuntu upstream *
Firefox Ubuntu xenial *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu bionic *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu bionic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu cosmic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu disco *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu eoan *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu esm-infra/bionic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu focal *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu groovy *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs60 Ubuntu cosmic *
Mozjs60 Ubuntu disco *
Mozjs60 Ubuntu eoan *
Mozjs60 Ubuntu upstream *
Thunderbird Ubuntu bionic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu cosmic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu devel *
Thunderbird Ubuntu disco *
Thunderbird Ubuntu eoan *
Thunderbird Ubuntu focal *
Thunderbird Ubuntu groovy *
Thunderbird Ubuntu hirsute *
Thunderbird Ubuntu impish *
Thunderbird Ubuntu jammy *
Thunderbird Ubuntu kinetic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu lunar *
Thunderbird Ubuntu mantic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu noble *
Thunderbird Ubuntu trusty *
Thunderbird Ubuntu upstream *
Thunderbird Ubuntu xenial *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat firefox-0:60.3.0-1.el6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat thunderbird-0:60.3.0-1.el6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat firefox-0:60.3.0-1.el7_5 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat thunderbird-0:60.3.0-1.el7_5 *

Potential Mitigations

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
  • If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
  • Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences.
  • Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++). [REF-106]
  • Perform input validation on any numeric input by ensuring that it is within the expected range. Enforce that the input meets both the minimum and maximum requirements for the expected range.
  • Use unsigned integers where possible. This makes it easier to perform validation for integer overflows. When signed integers are required, ensure that the range check includes minimum values as well as maximum values.
  • Understand the programming language’s underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation (CWE-681). Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, “not-a-number” calculations, and how the language handles numbers that are too large or too small for its underlying representation. [REF-7]
  • Also be careful to account for 32-bit, 64-bit, and other potential differences that may affect the numeric representation.

References