CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2020-0066

Out-of-bounds Write

Published: Mar 10, 2020 | Modified: Jul 21, 2021
CVSS 3.x
6.4
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
6.9 MEDIUM
AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

In the netlink driver, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a race condition. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android kernelAndroid ID: A-65025077

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Android Google - -
Linux Ubuntu precise/esm *
Linux Ubuntu trusty *
Linux Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Linux Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-aws Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-aws Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-aws-5.0 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-aws-hwe Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-azure Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-azure Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-azure-5.3 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-azure-edge Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-azure-edge Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-azure-edge Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-gcp Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gcp-5.3 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gcp-edge Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-gcp-edge Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gke-4.15 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gke-5.0 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-gke-5.3 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-hwe Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-hwe-edge Ubuntu bionic *
Linux-hwe-edge Ubuntu esm-infra/xenial *
Linux-hwe-edge Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-hwe-edge Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-kvm Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-trusty Ubuntu precise/esm *
Linux-lts-trusty Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-xenial Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-lts-xenial Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oem Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oem Ubuntu xenial *
Linux-oem-5.4 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oem-osp1 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oracle Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-oracle-5.0 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-raspi2 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-raspi2-5.3 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.

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that automatically provide a protection mechanism that mitigates or eliminates buffer overflows.

  • For example, certain compilers and extensions provide automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are built into the compiled code. Examples include the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice.

  • 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].

References