CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2021-20699

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')

Published: Jun 07, 2021 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
9.8
CRITICAL
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
10 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Sharp NEC Displays ((UN462A R1.300 and prior to it, UN462VA R1.300 and prior to it, UN492S R1.300 and prior to it, UN492VS R1.300 and prior to it, UN552A R1.300 and prior to it, UN552S R1.300 and prior to it, UN552VS R1.300 and prior to it, UN552 R1.300 and prior to it, UN552V R1.300 and prior to it, UX552S R1.300 and prior to it, UX552 R1.300 and prior to it, V864Q R2.000 and prior to it, C861Q R2.000 and prior to it, P754Q R2.000 and prior to it, V754Q R2.000 and prior to it, C751Q R2.000 and prior to it, V984Q R2.000 and prior to it, C981Q R2.000 and prior to it, P654Q R2.000 and prior to it, V654Q R2.000 and prior to it, C651Q R2.000 and prior to it, V554Q R2.000 and prior to it, P404 R3.200 and prior to it, P484 R3.200 and prior to it, P554 R3.200 and prior to it, V404 R3.200 and prior to it, V484 R3.200 and prior to it, V554 R3.200 and prior to it, V404-T R3.200 and prior to it, V484-T R3.200 and prior to it, V554-T R3.200 and prior to it, C501 R2.000 and prior to it, C551 R2.000 and prior to it, C431 R2.000 and prior to it) allows an attacker a buffer overflow and to execute remote code by sending long parameters that contains specific characters in http request.

Weakness

The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Un462a_firmware Sharp-nec-displays * r1.300 (including)

Extended Description

Command injection vulnerabilities typically occur when:

Many protocols and products have their own custom command language. While OS or shell command strings are frequently discovered and targeted, developers may not realize that these other command languages might also be vulnerable to attacks. Command injection is a common problem with wrapper programs.

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.

References