CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2021-42006

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Oct 04, 2021 | Modified: Oct 12, 2021
CVSS 3.x
8.8
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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
Ubuntu
LOW

An out-of-bounds access in GffLine::GffLine in gff.cpp in GCLib 0.12.7 allows an attacker to cause a segmentation fault or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted GFF file.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Gclib Gclib_project 0.12.7 (including) 0.12.7 (including)
Cufflinks Ubuntu bionic *
Cufflinks Ubuntu devel *
Cufflinks Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Cufflinks Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Cufflinks Ubuntu esm-apps/jammy *
Cufflinks Ubuntu esm-apps/noble *
Cufflinks Ubuntu focal *
Cufflinks Ubuntu hirsute *
Cufflinks Ubuntu impish *
Cufflinks Ubuntu jammy *
Cufflinks Ubuntu kinetic *
Cufflinks Ubuntu lunar *
Cufflinks Ubuntu mantic *
Cufflinks Ubuntu noble *
Cufflinks Ubuntu oracular *
Cufflinks Ubuntu trusty *
Cufflinks Ubuntu upstream *
Cufflinks Ubuntu xenial *
Libgclib Ubuntu hirsute *
Libgclib Ubuntu impish *
Libgclib Ubuntu kinetic *
Libgclib Ubuntu lunar *
Libgclib Ubuntu mantic *
Libgclib Ubuntu trusty *
Libgclib Ubuntu xenial *
Libgff Ubuntu bionic *
Libgff Ubuntu hirsute *
Libgff Ubuntu impish *
Libgff Ubuntu kinetic *
Libgff Ubuntu lunar *
Libgff Ubuntu mantic *
Libgff Ubuntu trusty *
Libgff Ubuntu xenial *
Stringtie Ubuntu hirsute *
Stringtie Ubuntu impish *
Stringtie Ubuntu kinetic *
Stringtie Ubuntu lunar *
Stringtie Ubuntu mantic *
Stringtie Ubuntu trusty *
Stringtie Ubuntu xenial *
Tophat Ubuntu bionic *
Tophat Ubuntu trusty *
Tophat Ubuntu xenial *

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