CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2022-27406

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Apr 22, 2022 | Modified: Feb 29, 2024
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
5 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.1 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
LOW

FreeType commit 22a0cccb4d9d002f33c1ba7a4b36812c7d4f46b5 was discovered to contain a segmentation violation via the function FT_Request_Size.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Freetype Freetype * 2.12.0 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat freetype-0:2.9.1-9.el8 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Extended Update Support RedHat freetype-0:2.9.1-5.el8_6.3 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 RedHat freetype-0:2.10.4-9.el9 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 RedHat freetype-0:2.10.4-9.el9 *
Freetype Ubuntu bionic *
Freetype Ubuntu esm-infra-legacy/trusty *
Freetype Ubuntu esm-infra/xenial *
Freetype Ubuntu focal *
Freetype Ubuntu impish *
Freetype Ubuntu jammy *
Freetype Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Freetype Ubuntu upstream *

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