CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2021-3575

Out-of-bounds Write

Published: Mar 04, 2022 | Modified: Feb 12, 2023
CVSS 3.x
7.8
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
6.8 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Ubuntu
LOW

A heap-based buffer overflow was found in openjpeg in color.c:379:42 in sycc420_to_rgb when decompressing a crafted .j2k file. An attacker could use this to execute arbitrary code with the permissions of the application compiled against openjpeg.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Openjpeg Uclouvain * 2.4.0 (including)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat openjpeg2-0:2.4.0-4.el8 *
Blender Ubuntu bionic *
Blender Ubuntu groovy *
Blender Ubuntu hirsute *
Blender Ubuntu impish *
Blender Ubuntu kinetic *
Blender Ubuntu lunar *
Blender Ubuntu mantic *
Blender Ubuntu trusty *
Blender Ubuntu xenial *
Ghostscript Ubuntu bionic *
Ghostscript Ubuntu trusty *
Ghostscript Ubuntu xenial *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu bionic *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu groovy *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu hirsute *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu impish *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu kinetic *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu lunar *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu trusty *
Insighttoolkit4 Ubuntu xenial *
Openjpeg Ubuntu trusty *
Openjpeg Ubuntu xenial *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu bionic *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu devel *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu focal *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu groovy *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu hirsute *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu impish *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu jammy *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu kinetic *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu lunar *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu mantic *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu noble *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu oracular *
Openjpeg2 Ubuntu xenial *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu bionic *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu groovy *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu hirsute *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu impish *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu kinetic *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu lunar *
Qtwebengine-opensource-src Ubuntu mantic *
Texmaker Ubuntu bionic *
Texmaker Ubuntu groovy *
Texmaker Ubuntu hirsute *
Texmaker Ubuntu impish *
Texmaker Ubuntu kinetic *
Texmaker Ubuntu lunar *
Texmaker Ubuntu mantic *
Texmaker Ubuntu trusty *
Texmaker Ubuntu xenial *

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.

  • 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.

  • 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]. 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].

  • Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].

References