Vulnerabilities
Misconfiguration
Runtime Security
Compliance
CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2022-38750

Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Published: Sep 05, 2022 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
5.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
5.5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
Additional information
NVDhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-38750
CWEhttps://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/121.html

Using snakeYAML to parse untrusted YAML files may be vulnerable to Denial of Service attacks (DOS). If the parser is running on user supplied input, an attacker may supply content that causes the parser to crash by stackoverflow.

Weakness

A stack-based buffer overflow condition is a condition where the buffer being overwritten is allocated on the stack (i.e., is a local variable or, rarely, a parameter to a function).

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Snakeyaml Snakeyaml_project * 1.31 (excluding)
Red Hat AMQ Broker 7 RedHat snakeyaml *
Red Hat build of Eclipse Vert.x 4.3.3 RedHat snakeyaml *
Red Hat Data Grid 8.4.0 RedHat snakeyaml *
Red Hat Satellite 6.13 for RHEL 8 RedHat candlepin-0:4.2.13-1.el8sat *
Red Hat Single Sign-On 7 RedHat snakeyaml *
Red Hat Single Sign-On 7.6 for RHEL 7 RedHat rh-sso7-keycloak-0:18.0.6-1.redhat_00001.1.el7sso *
Red Hat Single Sign-On 7.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat rh-sso7-keycloak-0:18.0.6-1.redhat_00001.1.el8sso *
Red Hat Single Sign-On 7.6 for RHEL 9 RedHat rh-sso7-keycloak-0:18.0.6-1.redhat_00001.1.el9sso *
RHEL-8 based Middleware Containers RedHat rh-sso-7/sso76-openshift-rhel8:7.6-20 *
RHINT Camel-Springboot 3.18.3.P2 RedHat snakeyaml *
RHINT Camel-Springboot 3.20.1 RedHat snakeyaml *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu bionic *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu esm-apps/xenial *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu focal *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu jammy *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu kinetic *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu trusty *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Snakeyaml Ubuntu xenial *

Potential Mitigations

  • 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.
  • 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].

References

Aqua Security is the largest pure-play cloud native security company, providing customers the freedom to innovate and run their businesses with minimal friction. The Aqua Cloud Native Security Platform provides prevention, detection, and response automation across the entire application lifecycle to secure the build, secure cloud infrastructure and secure running workloads wherever they are deployed.
Copyright © 2025 Aqua Security Software Ltd.   Privacy Policy | Terms of Use