CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2019-1000019

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Feb 04, 2019 | Modified: Nov 07, 2023
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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
6.5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
LOW

libarchive version commit bf9aec176c6748f0ee7a678c5f9f9555b9a757c1 onwards (release v3.0.2 onwards) contains a CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read vulnerability in 7zip decompression, archive_read_support_format_7zip.c, header_bytes() that can result in a crash (denial of service). This attack appears to be exploitable via the victim opening a specially crafted 7zip file.

Weakness

The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Libarchive Libarchive 3.0.2 (including) 3.4.0 (excluding)
Libarchive Ubuntu bionic *
Libarchive Ubuntu cosmic *
Libarchive Ubuntu devel *
Libarchive Ubuntu esm-infra/bionic *
Libarchive Ubuntu esm-infra/xenial *
Libarchive Ubuntu trusty *
Libarchive Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Libarchive Ubuntu xenial *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat libarchive-0:3.1.2-12.el7 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat libarchive-0:3.3.2-7.el8 *

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.

References