CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2022-31747

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Dec 22, 2022 | Modified: Aug 08, 2023
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
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
9.8 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

Mozilla developers Andrew McCreight, Nicolas B. Pierron, and the Mozilla Fuzzing Team reported memory safety bugs present in Firefox 100 and Firefox ESR 91.9. Some of these bugs showed evidence of memory corruption and we presume that with enough effort some of these could have been exploited to run arbitrary code. This vulnerability affects Thunderbird < 91.10, Firefox < 101, and Firefox ESR < 91.10.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Firefox Mozilla * 101 (excluding)
Firefox_esr Mozilla * 91.10 (excluding)
Thunderbird Mozilla * 91.10 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat firefox-0:91.10.0-1.el7_9 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat thunderbird-0:91.10.0-1.el7_9 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat firefox-0:91.10.0-1.el8_6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat thunderbird-0:91.10.0-1.el8_6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1 Update Services for SAP Solutions RedHat firefox-0:91.10.0-1.el8_1 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1 Update Services for SAP Solutions RedHat thunderbird-0:91.10.0-1.el8_1 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 Extended Update Support RedHat firefox-0:91.10.0-1.el8_2 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 Extended Update Support RedHat thunderbird-0:91.10.0-1.el8_2 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support RedHat firefox-0:91.10.0-1.el8_4 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support RedHat thunderbird-0:91.10.0-1.el8_4 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 RedHat firefox-0:91.10.0-1.el9_0 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 RedHat thunderbird-0:91.10.0-1.el9_0 *
Firefox Ubuntu bionic *
Firefox Ubuntu focal *
Firefox Ubuntu impish *
Firefox Ubuntu trusty *
Firefox Ubuntu upstream *
Firefox Ubuntu xenial *
Firefox-esr Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu bionic *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu bionic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu esm-infra/bionic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu focal *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs68 Ubuntu focal *
Mozjs68 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu esm-apps/jammy *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu impish *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu jammy *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu kinetic *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu lunar *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs91 Ubuntu jammy *
Mozjs91 Ubuntu upstream *
Thunderbird Ubuntu bionic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu devel *
Thunderbird Ubuntu focal *
Thunderbird Ubuntu impish *
Thunderbird Ubuntu jammy *
Thunderbird Ubuntu kinetic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu lunar *
Thunderbird Ubuntu mantic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu noble *
Thunderbird Ubuntu trusty *
Thunderbird Ubuntu upstream *
Thunderbird 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