CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2018-12641

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Published: Jun 22, 2018 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
5.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
4.3 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
3.3 LOW
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Ubuntu
LOW
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

An issue was discovered in arm_pt in cplus-dem.c in GNU libiberty, as distributed in GNU Binutils 2.30. Stack Exhaustion occurs in the C++ demangling functions provided by libiberty, and there are recursive stack frames: demangle_arm_hp_template, demangle_class_name, demangle_fund_type, do_type, do_arg, demangle_args, and demangle_nested_args. This can occur during execution of nm-new.

Weakness

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
BinutilsGnu2.30 (including)2.30 (including)
Red Hat Ansible Tower 3.4 for RHEL 7RedHatansible-tower-34/ansible-tower-memcached:1.4.15-28*
Red Hat Ansible Tower 3.4 for RHEL 7RedHatansible-tower-35/ansible-tower-memcached:1.4.15-28*
Red Hat Ansible Tower 3.4 for RHEL 7RedHatansible-tower-37/ansible-tower-memcached-rhel7:1.4.15-28*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7RedHatbinutils-0:2.27-41.base.el7*
BinutilsUbuntuartful*
BinutilsUbuntubionic*
BinutilsUbuntuesm-infra-legacy/trusty*
BinutilsUbuntuesm-infra/bionic*
BinutilsUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
BinutilsUbuntuprecise/esm*
BinutilsUbuntutrusty*
BinutilsUbuntutrusty/esm*
BinutilsUbuntuupstream*
BinutilsUbuntuxenial*
LibibertyUbuntuartful*
LibibertyUbuntubionic*
LibibertyUbuntucosmic*
LibibertyUbuntudisco*
LibibertyUbuntuesm-infra/bionic*
LibibertyUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
LibibertyUbuntutrusty*
LibibertyUbuntuupstream*
LibibertyUbuntuxenial*

Potential Mitigations

  • Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:

  • The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.

  • The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.

References