Buffer over-reads were discovered in the CoAP library in Arm Mbed OS 5.15.3. The CoAP parser is responsible for parsing received CoAP packets. The function sn_coap_parser_options_parse() parses CoAP input linearly using a while loop. Once an option is parsed in a loop, the current point (*packet_data_pptr) is increased correspondingly. The pointer is restricted by the size of the received buffer, as well as by the option delta and option length bytes. The actual input packet length is not verified against the number of bytes read when processing the option extended delta and the option extended length. Moreover, the calculation of the message_left variable, in the case of non-extended option deltas, is incorrect and indicates more data left for processing than provided in the function input. All of these lead to heap-based or stack-based memory location read access that is outside of the intended boundary of the buffer. Depending on the platform-specific memory management mechanisms, it can lead to processing of unintended inputs or system memory access violation errors.
Weakness
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Affected Software
| Name |
Vendor |
Start Version |
End Version |
| Mbed_os |
Arm |
5.15.3 (including) |
5.15.3 (including) |
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