CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2019-9162

Out-of-bounds Write

Published: Feb 25, 2019 | Modified: Apr 05, 2022
CVSS 3.x
7.8
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
4.6 MEDIUM
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.8 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

In the Linux kernel before 4.20.12, net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_snmp_basic_main.c in the SNMP NAT module has insufficient ASN.1 length checks (aka an array index error), making out-of-bounds read and write operations possible, leading to an OOPS or local privilege escalation. This affects snmp_version and snmp_helper.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Linux_kernel Linux 4.19 (including) 4.19.25 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 4.20 (including) 4.20.12 (excluding)
Linux Ubuntu cosmic *
Linux Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-aws Ubuntu cosmic *
Linux-aws Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-aws-hwe Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-azure Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-azure Ubuntu cosmic *
Linux-azure Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-azure-edge Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-azure-edge Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-euclid Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-flo Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Linux-flo Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-flo Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-flo Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-gcp Ubuntu cosmic *
Linux-gcp Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gcp-edge Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-gcp-edge Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gke Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gke Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-grouper Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-grouper Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-hwe Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-hwe Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-hwe-edge Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-kvm Ubuntu cosmic *
Linux-kvm Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-trusty Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-utopic Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-lts-utopic Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-vivid Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-lts-vivid Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-wily Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-lts-wily Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-xenial Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-maguro Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-maguro Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-mako Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Linux-mako Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-mako Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-mako Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-manta Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-manta Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oem Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oem Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-oracle Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-raspi2 Ubuntu cosmic *
Linux-raspi2 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-snapdragon Ubuntu upstream *

Potential Mitigations

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

  • Be wary that a language’s interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.

  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.

  • D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.

  • Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application’s memory:

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.

  • Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as “rebasing” (for Windows) and “prelinking” (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

  • Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].

References