CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2022-39320

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Nov 16, 2022 | Modified: Jan 12, 2024
CVSS 3.x
4.6
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
3.7 LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
Ubuntu
LOW

FreeRDP is a free remote desktop protocol library and clients. Affected versions of FreeRDP may attempt integer addition on too narrow types leads to allocation of a buffer too small holding the data written. A malicious server can trick a FreeRDP based client to read out of bound data and send it back to the server. This issue has been addressed in version 2.9.0 and all users are advised to upgrade. Users unable to upgrade should not use the /usb redirection switch.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Freerdp Freerdp * 2.9.0 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat freerdp-2:2.2.0-10.el8 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 RedHat freerdp-2:2.4.1-5.el9 *
Freerdp Ubuntu bionic *
Freerdp Ubuntu trusty *
Freerdp Ubuntu xenial *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu bionic *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu devel *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu focal *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu jammy *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu kinetic *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu lunar *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu mantic *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu noble *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu oracular *
Freerdp2 Ubuntu trusty *
Freerdp2 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