CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2018-14660

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Published: Nov 01, 2018 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
4 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
6.5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

A flaw was found in glusterfs server through versions 4.1.4 and 3.1.2 which allowed repeated usage of GF_META_LOCK_KEY xattr. A remote, authenticated attacker could use this flaw to create multiple locks for single inode by using setxattr repetitively resulting in memory exhaustion of glusterfs server node.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
GlusterfsGluster3.1.0 (including)3.1.2 (including)
GlusterfsGluster4.1.0 (including)4.1.4 (including)
Native Client for RHEL 6 for Red Hat StorageRedHatglusterfs-0:3.12.2-25.el6*
Native Client for RHEL 7 for Red Hat StorageRedHatglusterfs-0:3.12.2-25.el7*
Red Hat Gluster Storage 3.4 for RHEL 6RedHatglusterfs-0:3.12.2-25.el6rhs*
Red Hat Gluster Storage 3.4 for RHEL 6RedHatredhat-storage-server-0:3.4.1.0-1.el6rhs*
Red Hat Gluster Storage 3.4 for RHEL 7RedHatglusterfs-0:3.12.2-25.el7rhgs*
Red Hat Gluster Storage 3.4 for RHEL 7RedHatredhat-storage-server-0:3.4.1.0-1.el7rhgs*
Red Hat Virtualization 4 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7RedHatglusterfs-0:3.12.2-25.el7*
Red Hat Virtualization 4 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7RedHatimgbased-0:1.0.29-1.el7ev*
Red Hat Virtualization 4 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7RedHatredhat-release-virtualization-host-0:4.2-7.3.el7*
Red Hat Virtualization 4 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7RedHatredhat-virtualization-host-0:4.2-20181026.0.el7_6*
GlusterfsUbuntubionic*
GlusterfsUbuntucosmic*
GlusterfsUbuntuesm-apps/bionic*

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