CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2020-29443

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Jan 26, 2021 | Modified: Sep 30, 2022
CVSS 3.x
3.9
LOW
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS 2.x
3.3 LOW
AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
3.9 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Ubuntu
LOW

ide_atapi_cmd_reply_end in hw/ide/atapi.c in QEMU 5.1.0 allows out-of-bounds read access because a buffer index is not validated.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Qemu Qemu 5.1.0 (including) 5.1.0 (including)
Qemu Ubuntu bionic *
Qemu Ubuntu devel *
Qemu Ubuntu esm-infra-legacy/trusty *
Qemu Ubuntu focal *
Qemu Ubuntu groovy *
Qemu Ubuntu hirsute *
Qemu Ubuntu impish *
Qemu Ubuntu jammy *
Qemu Ubuntu kinetic *
Qemu Ubuntu lunar *
Qemu Ubuntu mantic *
Qemu Ubuntu noble *
Qemu Ubuntu oracular *
Qemu Ubuntu trusty *
Qemu Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Qemu Ubuntu xenial *
Qemu-kvm Ubuntu precise/esm *
Advanced Virtualization for RHEL 8.3.1 RedHat virt:8.3-8030120210211160750.71132145 *
Advanced Virtualization for RHEL 8.3.1 RedHat virt-devel:8.3-8030120210211160750.71132145 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat qemu-kvm-10:1.5.3-175.el7_9.4 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat virt-devel:rhel-8040020210317013608.9f9e2e7e *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat virt:rhel-8040020210317013608.9f9e2e7e *
Red Hat Virtualization 4 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat qemu-kvm-rhev-10:2.12.0-48.el7_9.3 *
Red Hat Virtualization Engine 4.3 RedHat qemu-kvm-rhev-10:2.12.0-48.el7_9.3 *

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