subsys/net/lib/lwm2m/lwm2m_pull_context.c copied the firmware-update Package URI into a fixed static buffer (context.uri, size CONFIG_LWM2M_SWMGMT_PACKAGE_URI_LEN, default 128) with memcpy(context.uri, uri, LWM2M_PACKAGE_URI_LEN), copying exactly the destination size with no length validation. The Firmware-Update object stores the server-supplied Package URI (/5/0/1) in a 255-byte buffer, so a LwM2M management server (or an on-path attacker on a session lacking strong DTLS) can WRITE a URI of 128-254 characters; only the first 128 bytes are then copied into context.uri with no NUL terminator. That buffer is subsequently consumed as a C string by http_parser_parse_url(context.uri, strlen(context.uri), …), strlen-based CoAP URI-path/PROXY-URI option appends, and lwm2m_parse_peerinfo(), causing an out-of-bounds read of adjacent static memory. The over-read bytes are appended to outbound CoAP requests (information disclosure of adjacent device memory to the server/proxy) and can crash the device (denial of service). The vulnerable copy was introduced by the pull-context refactor (first released in v3.0.0) and is present through v4.4.0; the default-on CONFIG_LWM2M_FIRMWARE_UPDATE_PULL_SUPPORT path is affected. The fix adds a strlen(uri) >= sizeof(context.uri) check returning -ENOMEM and switches to strcpy(), guaranteeing a bounded, NUL-terminated buffer.
Weakness
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
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.