CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-7264

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Jul 31, 2024 | Modified: Aug 12, 2024
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
5.3 LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

libcurls ASN1 parser code has the GTime2str() function, used for parsing an ASN.1 Generalized Time field. If given an syntactically incorrect field, the parser might end up using -1 for the length of the time fraction, leading to a strlen() getting performed on a pointer to a heap buffer area that is not (purposely) null terminated.

This flaw most likely leads to a crash, but can also lead to heap contents getting returned to the application when CURLINFO_CERTINFO is used.

Weakness

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

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Libcurl Haxx 7.32.0 (including) 8.9.1 (excluding)
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/grafana-rhel8:2.6.2-3 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/istio-cni-rhel8:2.6.2-5 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/istio-must-gather-rhel8:2.6.2-4 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/istio-rhel8-operator:2.6.2-5 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel8:1.89.2-3 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel8:1.89.4-3 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel8-operator:1.89.6-1 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/pilot-rhel8:2.6.2-5 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 8 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/ratelimit-rhel8:2.6.2-3 *
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6 for RHEL 9 RedHat openshift-service-mesh/proxyv2-rhel9:2.6.2-7 *
Curl Ubuntu devel *
Curl Ubuntu esm-infra/bionic *
Curl Ubuntu esm-infra/xenial *
Curl Ubuntu focal *
Curl Ubuntu jammy *
Curl Ubuntu noble *
Curl Ubuntu oracular *
Curl Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Curl 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