CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2020-27841

Heap-based Buffer Overflow

Published: Jan 05, 2021 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
5.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/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
5.5 LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
LOW
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

Theres a flaw in openjpeg in versions prior to 2.4.0 in src/lib/openjp2/pi.c. When an attacker is able to provide crafted input to be processed by the openjpeg encoder, this could cause an out-of-bounds read. The greatest impact from this flaw is to application availability.

Weakness

A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
OpenjpegUclouvain*2.4.0 (excluding)
BlenderUbuntutrusty*
GhostscriptUbuntubionic*
GhostscriptUbuntuesm-infra/bionic*
GhostscriptUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
GhostscriptUbuntutrusty*
GhostscriptUbuntuxenial*
Insighttoolkit4Ubuntutrusty*
Openjpeg2Ubuntubionic*
Openjpeg2Ubuntudevel*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuesm-apps/bionic*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuesm-apps/xenial*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuesm-infra/focal*
Openjpeg2Ubuntufocal*
Openjpeg2Ubuntugroovy*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuhirsute*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuimpish*
Openjpeg2Ubuntujammy*
Openjpeg2Ubuntukinetic*
Openjpeg2Ubuntulunar*
Openjpeg2Ubuntumantic*
Openjpeg2Ubuntunoble*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuoracular*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuplucky*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuquesting*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuupstream*
Openjpeg2Ubuntuxenial*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntubionic*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntufocal*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntugroovy*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntuhirsute*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntuimpish*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntukinetic*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntulunar*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntumantic*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntuoracular*
Qtwebengine-opensource-srcUbuntuplucky*
TexmakerUbuntutrusty*

Potential Mitigations

  • 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.
  • 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].

References