CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2019-10654

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Mar 30, 2019 | Modified: Sep 02, 2022
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
Ubuntu
LOW

The lzo1x_decompress function in liblzo2.so.2 in LZO 2.10, as used in Long Range Zip (aka lrzip) 0.631, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (invalid memory read and application crash) via a crafted archive, a different vulnerability than CVE-2017-8845.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Long_range_zip Long_range_zip_project 0.631 (including) 0.631 (including)
Lrzip Ubuntu bionic *
Lrzip Ubuntu cosmic *
Lrzip Ubuntu devel *
Lrzip Ubuntu disco *
Lrzip Ubuntu eoan *
Lrzip Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Lrzip Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Lrzip Ubuntu esm-apps/jammy *
Lrzip Ubuntu esm-apps/noble *
Lrzip Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Lrzip Ubuntu focal *
Lrzip Ubuntu groovy *
Lrzip Ubuntu hirsute *
Lrzip Ubuntu impish *
Lrzip Ubuntu jammy *
Lrzip Ubuntu kinetic *
Lrzip Ubuntu lunar *
Lrzip Ubuntu mantic *
Lrzip Ubuntu noble *
Lrzip Ubuntu oracular *
Lrzip Ubuntu trusty *
Lrzip Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Lrzip Ubuntu upstream *
Lrzip Ubuntu xenial *

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