GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration
Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-125

Allowed

Out-of-bounds Read

Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

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

12334 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-JW9G-6HXW-4WHQ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-02 18:31 – Updated: 2026-04-02 18:31
VLAI
Details

An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.6. An out-of-bounds read vulnerability in mbedtls_ccm_finish() in library/ccm.c allows attackers to obtain adjacent CCM context data via invocation of the multipart CCM API with an oversized tag_len parameter. This is caused by missing validation of the tag_len parameter against the size of the internal 16-byte authentication buffer. The issue affects the public multipart CCM API in Mbed TLS 3.x, where mbedtls_ccm_finish() can be invoked directly by applications. In Mbed TLS 4.x versions prior to the fix, the same missing validation exists in the internal implementation; however, the function is not exposed as part of the public API. Exploitation requires application-level invocation of the multipart CCM API.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-34876"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-04-02T16:16:26Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "An issue was discovered in Mbed TLS 3.x before 3.6.6. An out-of-bounds read vulnerability in mbedtls_ccm_finish() in library/ccm.c allows attackers to obtain adjacent CCM context data via invocation of the multipart CCM API with an oversized tag_len parameter. This is caused by missing validation of the tag_len parameter against the size of the internal 16-byte authentication buffer. The issue affects the public multipart CCM API in Mbed TLS 3.x, where mbedtls_ccm_finish() can be invoked directly by applications. In Mbed TLS 4.x versions prior to the fix, the same missing validation exists in the internal implementation; however, the function is not exposed as part of the public API. Exploitation requires application-level invocation of the multipart CCM API.",
  "id": "GHSA-jw9g-6hxw-4whq",
  "modified": "2026-04-02T18:31:37Z",
  "published": "2026-04-02T18:31:37Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-34876"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/security-advisories/mbedtls-security-advisory-2026-03-ccm-finish-boundary-check"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tech-updates/security-advisories"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWF8-43XW-QVCR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-08-22 15:33 – Updated: 2026-08-27 15:30
VLAI
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

tls: handle data disappearing from under the TLS ULP

TLS expects that it owns the receive queue of the TCP socket. This cannot be guaranteed in case the reader of the TCP socket entered before the TLS ULP was installed, or uses some non-standard read API (eg. zerocopy ones). Replace the WARN_ON() and a buggy early exit (which leaves anchor pointing to a freed skb) with real error handling. Wipe the parsing state and tell the reader to retry.

We already reload the anchor every time we (re)acquire the socket lock, so the only condition we need to avoid is an out of bounds read (not having enough bytes in the socket for previously parsed record len).

If some data was read from under TLS but there's enough in the queue we'll reload and decrypt what is most likely not a valid TLS record. Leading to some undefined behavior from TLS perspective (corrupting a stream? missing an alert? missing an attack?) but no kernel crash should take place.

Severity
7.1 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-38616"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-08-22T14:15:46Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\ntls: handle data disappearing from under the TLS ULP\n\nTLS expects that it owns the receive queue of the TCP socket.\nThis cannot be guaranteed in case the reader of the TCP socket\nentered before the TLS ULP was installed, or uses some non-standard\nread API (eg. zerocopy ones). Replace the WARN_ON() and a buggy\nearly exit (which leaves anchor pointing to a freed skb) with real\nerror handling. Wipe the parsing state and tell the reader to retry.\n\nWe already reload the anchor every time we (re)acquire the socket lock,\nso the only condition we need to avoid is an out of bounds read\n(not having enough bytes in the socket for previously parsed record len).\n\nIf some data was read from under TLS but there\u0027s enough in the queue\nwe\u0027ll reload and decrypt what is most likely not a valid TLS record.\nLeading to some undefined behavior from TLS perspective (corrupting\na stream? missing an alert? missing an attack?) but no kernel crash\nshould take place.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwf8-43xw-qvcr",
  "modified": "2026-08-27T15:30:29Z",
  "published": "2025-08-22T15:33:05Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-38616"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2fb97ed9e2672b4f6e24ce206ac1a875ce4bcb38"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6db015fc4b5d5f63a64a193f65d98da3a7fc811d"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/db3658a12d5ec4db7185ae7476151a50521b7207"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/eb0336f213fe88bbdb7d2b19c9c9ec19245a3155"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ef50eaab631f9bf519ddbdfa42ccb0528adc1fc8"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f1fe99919f629f980d0b8a7ff16950bffe06a859"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWF9-W5XM-F437

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-08-25 14:40 – Updated: 2024-11-13 21:21
VLAI
Summary
Heap OOB in TFLite's `Gather*` implementations
Details

Impact

TFLite's GatherNd implementation does not support negative indices but there are no checks for this situation.

Hence, an attacker can read arbitrary data from the heap by carefully crafting a model with negative values in indices.

Similar issue exists in Gather implementation.

import tensorflow as tf
import numpy as np
tf.compat.v1.disable_v2_behavior()

params = tf.compat.v1.placeholder(name="params", dtype=tf.int64, shape=(1,))
indices = tf.compat.v1.placeholder(name="indices", dtype=tf.int64, shape=())

out = tf.gather(params, indices, name='out')

with tf.compat.v1.Session() as sess:
   converter = tf.compat.v1.lite.TFLiteConverter.from_session(sess, [params, indices], [out])
   tflite_model = converter.convert()

interpreter = tf.lite.Interpreter(model_content=tflite_model)
interpreter.allocate_tensors()

input_details = interpreter.get_input_details()
output_details = interpreter.get_output_details()

params_data = np.reshape(np.array([1], dtype=np.int64), newshape=(1,))
indices_data = np.reshape(np.array(-10, dtype=np.int64), newshape=())
interpreter.set_tensor(input_details[0]['index'], params_data)
interpreter.set_tensor(input_details[1]['index'], indices_data)

interpreter.invoke()

Patches

We have patched the issue in GitHub commits bb6a0383ed553c286f87ca88c207f6774d5c4a8f and eb921122119a6b6e470ee98b89e65d721663179d.

The fix will be included in TensorFlow 2.6.0. We will also cherrypick this commit on TensorFlow 2.5.1, TensorFlow 2.4.3, and TensorFlow 2.3.4, as these are also affected and still in supported range.

For more information

Please consult our security guide for more information regarding the security model and how to contact us with issues and questions.

Attribution

This vulnerability has been reported by Yakun Zhang of Baidu Security.

Severity
5.5 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
6.8 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.3.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.4.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.5.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ],
      "versions": [
        "2.5.0"
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow-cpu"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.3.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow-cpu"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.4.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow-cpu"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.5.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ],
      "versions": [
        "2.5.0"
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow-gpu"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.3.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow-gpu"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.4.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tensorflow-gpu"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.5.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.5.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ],
      "versions": [
        "2.5.0"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-37687"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2021-08-24T17:49:13Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2021-08-12T23:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\nTFLite\u0027s [`GatherNd` implementation](https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/149562d49faa709ea80df1d99fc41d005b81082a/tensorflow/lite/kernels/gather_nd.cc#L124) does not support negative indices but there are no checks for this situation.\n\nHence, an attacker can read arbitrary data from the heap by carefully crafting a model with negative values in `indices`.\n\nSimilar issue exists in [`Gather` implementation](https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/149562d49faa709ea80df1d99fc41d005b81082a/tensorflow/lite/kernels/gather.cc).\n\n```python\nimport tensorflow as tf\nimport numpy as np\ntf.compat.v1.disable_v2_behavior()\n\nparams = tf.compat.v1.placeholder(name=\"params\", dtype=tf.int64, shape=(1,))\nindices = tf.compat.v1.placeholder(name=\"indices\", dtype=tf.int64, shape=())\n\nout = tf.gather(params, indices, name=\u0027out\u0027)\n\nwith tf.compat.v1.Session() as sess:\n   converter = tf.compat.v1.lite.TFLiteConverter.from_session(sess, [params, indices], [out])\n   tflite_model = converter.convert()\n\ninterpreter = tf.lite.Interpreter(model_content=tflite_model)\ninterpreter.allocate_tensors()\n\ninput_details = interpreter.get_input_details()\noutput_details = interpreter.get_output_details()\n\nparams_data = np.reshape(np.array([1], dtype=np.int64), newshape=(1,))\nindices_data = np.reshape(np.array(-10, dtype=np.int64), newshape=())\ninterpreter.set_tensor(input_details[0][\u0027index\u0027], params_data)\ninterpreter.set_tensor(input_details[1][\u0027index\u0027], indices_data)\n\ninterpreter.invoke()\n```\n\n### Patches\nWe have patched the issue in GitHub commits [bb6a0383ed553c286f87ca88c207f6774d5c4a8f](https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/commit/bb6a0383ed553c286f87ca88c207f6774d5c4a8f) and [eb921122119a6b6e470ee98b89e65d721663179d](https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/commit/eb921122119a6b6e470ee98b89e65d721663179d).\n\nThe fix will be included in TensorFlow 2.6.0. We will also cherrypick this commit on TensorFlow 2.5.1, TensorFlow 2.4.3, and TensorFlow 2.3.4, as these are also affected and still in supported range.\n\n### For more information\nPlease consult [our security  guide](https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/master/SECURITY.md) for more information regarding the security model and how to contact us with issues and questions.\n\n### Attribution\nThis vulnerability has been reported by Yakun Zhang of Baidu Security.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwf9-w5xm-f437",
  "modified": "2024-11-13T21:21:55Z",
  "published": "2021-08-25T14:40:02Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/security/advisories/GHSA-jwf9-w5xm-f437"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-37687"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/commit/bb6a0383ed553c286f87ca88c207f6774d5c4a8f"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/commit/eb921122119a6b6e470ee98b89e65d721663179d"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/tensorflow-cpu/PYSEC-2021-600.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/tensorflow-gpu/PYSEC-2021-798.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/tensorflow/PYSEC-2021-309.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/149562d49faa709ea80df1d99fc41d005b81082a/tensorflow/lite/kernels/gather.cc"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/149562d49faa709ea80df1d99fc41d005b81082a/tensorflow/lite/kernels/gather_nd.cc#L124"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Heap OOB in TFLite\u0027s `Gather*` implementations"
}

GHSA-JWH9-P9PJ-G4PF

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:45 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:45
VLAI
Details

In all android releases(Android for MSM, Firefox OS for MSM, QRD Android) from CAF using the linux kernel, while processing the boot image header, an out of bounds read can occur in boot.

Severity
7.8 (High)
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2017-11078"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-11-27T16:29:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "In all android releases(Android for MSM, Firefox OS for MSM, QRD Android) from CAF using the linux kernel, while processing the boot image header, an out of bounds read can occur in boot.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwh9-p9pj-g4pf",
  "modified": "2022-05-14T01:45:56Z",
  "published": "2022-05-14T01:45:56Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-11078"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://source.codeaurora.org/quic/la/kernel/lk/commit/?id=c975b4c716511c9086f6eb885f9a3524c428a19b"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.codeaurora.org/security-bulletin/2018/11/05/november-2018-code-aurora-forum-security-bulletin"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWHC-74H7-9587

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-08 21:31 – Updated: 2024-04-04 03:51
VLAI
Details

An out-of-bounds read was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Ventura 13.3, macOS Monterey 12.6.4, iOS 15.7.4 and iPadOS 15.7.4. Processing a maliciously crafted file may lead to unexpected app termination or arbitrary code execution

Severity
7.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-27949"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-05-08T20:15:18Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "An out-of-bounds read was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Ventura 13.3, macOS Monterey 12.6.4, iOS 15.7.4 and iPadOS 15.7.4. Processing a maliciously crafted file may lead to unexpected app termination or arbitrary code execution",
  "id": "GHSA-jwhc-74h7-9587",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T03:51:56Z",
  "published": "2023-05-08T21:31:07Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-27949"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213670"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213673"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213677"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2023/May/7"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWJF-H4V6-QRPP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-08-27 21:31 – Updated: 2024-09-07 00:31
VLAI
Details

In function MatchDomainName(), input param str is treated as a NULL terminated string despite being user provided and unchecked. Specifically, the function X509_check_host() takes in a pointer and length to check against, with no requirements that it be NULL terminated. If a caller was attempting to do a name check on a non-NULL terminated buffer, the code would read beyond the bounds of the input array until it found a NULL terminator.This issue affects wolfSSL: through 5.7.0.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
10.0 (Critical)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-5991"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-08-27T19:15:18Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "In function MatchDomainName(), input param str is treated as a NULL terminated string despite being user provided and unchecked. Specifically, the function X509_check_host() takes in a pointer and length to check against, with no requirements that it be NULL terminated. If a caller was attempting to do a name check on a non-NULL terminated buffer, the code would read beyond the bounds of the input array until it found a NULL terminator.This issue affects wolfSSL: through 5.7.0.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwjf-h4v6-qrpp",
  "modified": "2024-09-07T00:31:28Z",
  "published": "2024-08-27T21:31:14Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-5991"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/7604"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/pull/7604"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWJP-4649-V8JP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-12 19:30 – Updated: 2026-08-12 19:30
VLAI
Summary
SIPSorcery vulnerable to Denial of Service via out-of-bounds read in SCTP SACK chunk parsing
Details

Summary

SctpSackChunk.ParseChunk reads the numGapAckBlocks and numDuplicateTSNs fields (each up to 65535) directly from an attacker-controlled SCTP SACK chunk and loops that many times reading 4 bytes per iteration, with no validation of the counts against the chunk length or the receive buffer. A single crafted SACK chunk from a negotiated WebRTC peer forces reads past the end of the 262144-byte receive buffer, raising IndexOutOfRangeException, which is not caught by the recoverable handler and terminates the dedicated SCTP receive thread — permanently killing the SCTP association and all data channels.

Root Cause

src/SIPSorcery/net/SCTP/Chunks/SctpSackChunk.cs: - ushort numGapAckBlocks = NetConvert.ParseUInt16(buffer, startPosn + 8); (:141) - ushort numDuplicateTSNs = NetConvert.ParseUInt16(buffer, startPosn + 10); (:142) - gap-ack loop (:146) and duplicate-TSN loop (:154) index the buffer via NetConvert.ParseUInt16/32 (buffer[posn], no bounds check — sys/Net/NetConvert.cs:30,41). SctpPacket.ParseChunks (SctpPacket.cs:195-203) only validates chunkLength >= 4 and posn+chunkLength <= length; the counts inside the value are never checked. RTCSctpTransport.DoReceive calls SctpPacket.Parse(recvBuffer, 0, bytesRead) on a reused recvBuffer = new byte[262144].

Impact

IndexOutOfRangeException is a SystemException, not ApplicationException, so the recoverable catch (ApplicationException) { … continue; } at RTCSctpTransport.cs:345 is skipped and control falls to the generic catch (Exception) { … break; } at :356. The break exits the receive loop, DoReceive returns, and the dedicated _receiveThread = new Thread(DoReceive) (:173, started once) exits with no restart → the SCTP association and every data channel are permanently dead (denial of service).

Proof of Concept

A negotiated WebRTC peer (post-DTLS) sends a checksum-valid SCTP packet: 12-byte common header + a SACK chunk (type 3) with chunkLength=16, numGapAckBlocks=0xFFFF, numDuplicateTSNs=0xFFFF. CRC32C is attacker-computable. The gap-ack loop reaches buffer[262144] on a 262144-byte array (valid indices 0..262143) → IndexOutOfRangeException.

Attack Chain

  1. Entry: post-DTLS negotiated peer sends a checksum-valid SCTP packet with a SACK chunk (chunkLength=16, numGapAckBlocks=0xFFFF). Guard: VerifyChecksum (CRC32C). Bypass: CRC32C is computable by the sender.
  2. Processing: DoReceive (RTCSctpTransport.cs:286) reads into reused recvBuffer (262144 bytes, :280) → SctpPacket.Parse(recvBuffer, 0, bytesRead) (:302) → ParseChunks → SACK dispatch (SctpChunk.Parse :340-341) → SctpSackChunk.ParseChunk. Guard: ParseChunks checks only chunkLength>=4 and posn+chunkLength<=length (SctpPacket.cs:195-203). Bypass: chunkLength=16 is well-formed; the counts are never validated.
  3. Sink: gap-ack loop (SctpSackChunk.cs:146) calls NetConvert.ParseUInt16(buffer, reportPosn) with reportPosn starting at startPosn(16)+FIXED_PARAMETERS(12)=28, climbing +4 each iteration. Guard: none on the count. Bypass: NetConvert.ParseUInt16 (NetConvert.cs:30) indexes buffer[posn] unchecked.
  4. Impact: at iteration 65529, reportPosn = 28 + 65529*4 = 262144 → buffer[262144] → IndexOutOfRangeException → generic catch at RTCSctpTransport.cs:356 → break → receive thread exits, no restart → association permanently dead.

Bypass Evidence

  • Unchecked counts at SctpSackChunk.cs:141-142; loops at :146,:154.
  • NetConvert.ParseUInt16 unchecked indexing (NetConvert.cs:30).
  • ParseChunks validates only chunkLength (SctpPacket.cs:195-203).
  • OOB math: 28 + 65535*4 = 262168 > 262144; buffer is 262144 (DEFAULT_ADVERTISED_RECEIVE_WINDOW, SctpAssociation.cs:62). numGapAckBlocks alone suffices — the dup-TSN loop is not needed.
  • DoReceive catch split: recoverable catch(ApplicationException) at :345 (continue) vs generic catch(Exception) at :356 (break); _receiveThread started once at :176.

Affected Versions

nuget:SIPSorcery <= 10.0.13 (verified present on release tag v10.0.13 and HEAD da944543).

Dedup

NOT a duplicate of GHSA-qmvg-569h-hqrh — that fix (fe5a1fa) touched only SctpPacket.cs (the chunk-cursor zero-length infinite loop, CWE-835). This is a distinct out-of-bounds read (CWE-125) in SctpSackChunk count loops, untouched by that fix.

Suggested Fix

Validate startPosn + FIXED_PARAMETERS_LENGTH + numGapAckBlocks*4 + numDuplicateTSNs*4 <= posn + chunkLen before the loops, and/or make NetConvert.Parse* bounds-checked, and/or treat IndexOutOfRangeException/ArgumentException as recoverable in DoReceive.

Reported by zx (Jace) — GitHub: @manus-use

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 10.0.13"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "NuGet",
        "name": "SIPSorcery"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "10.0.14"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125",
      "CWE-755"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-08-12T19:30:43Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n`SctpSackChunk.ParseChunk` reads the `numGapAckBlocks` and `numDuplicateTSNs` fields (each up to 65535) directly from an attacker-controlled SCTP SACK chunk and loops that many times reading 4 bytes per iteration, with no validation of the counts against the chunk length or the receive buffer. A single crafted SACK chunk from a negotiated WebRTC peer forces reads past the end of the 262144-byte receive buffer, raising `IndexOutOfRangeException`, which is not caught by the recoverable handler and terminates the dedicated SCTP receive thread \u2014 permanently killing the SCTP association and all data channels.\n\n## Root Cause\n`src/SIPSorcery/net/SCTP/Chunks/SctpSackChunk.cs`:\n- `ushort numGapAckBlocks = NetConvert.ParseUInt16(buffer, startPosn + 8);` (:141)\n- `ushort numDuplicateTSNs = NetConvert.ParseUInt16(buffer, startPosn + 10);` (:142)\n- gap-ack loop (:146) and duplicate-TSN loop (:154) index the buffer via `NetConvert.ParseUInt16/32` (`buffer[posn]`, no bounds check \u2014 `sys/Net/NetConvert.cs:30,41`).\n`SctpPacket.ParseChunks` (SctpPacket.cs:195-203) only validates `chunkLength \u003e= 4` and `posn+chunkLength \u003c= length`; the counts inside the value are never checked. `RTCSctpTransport.DoReceive` calls `SctpPacket.Parse(recvBuffer, 0, bytesRead)` on a reused `recvBuffer = new byte[262144]`.\n\n## Impact\n`IndexOutOfRangeException` is a `SystemException`, not `ApplicationException`, so the recoverable `catch (ApplicationException) { \u2026 continue; }` at RTCSctpTransport.cs:345 is skipped and control falls to the generic `catch (Exception) { \u2026 break; }` at :356. The `break` exits the receive loop, `DoReceive` returns, and the dedicated `_receiveThread = new Thread(DoReceive)` (:173, started once) exits with no restart \u2192 the SCTP association and every data channel are permanently dead (denial of service).\n\n## Proof of Concept\nA negotiated WebRTC peer (post-DTLS) sends a checksum-valid SCTP packet: 12-byte common header + a SACK chunk (type 3) with `chunkLength=16`, `numGapAckBlocks=0xFFFF`, `numDuplicateTSNs=0xFFFF`. CRC32C is attacker-computable. The gap-ack loop reaches `buffer[262144]` on a 262144-byte array (valid indices 0..262143) \u2192 `IndexOutOfRangeException`.\n\n## Attack Chain\n1. Entry: post-DTLS negotiated peer sends a checksum-valid SCTP packet with a SACK chunk (`chunkLength=16`, `numGapAckBlocks=0xFFFF`). Guard: `VerifyChecksum` (CRC32C). Bypass: CRC32C is computable by the sender.\n2. Processing: `DoReceive` (RTCSctpTransport.cs:286) reads into reused `recvBuffer` (262144 bytes, :280) \u2192 `SctpPacket.Parse(recvBuffer, 0, bytesRead)` (:302) \u2192 `ParseChunks` \u2192 SACK dispatch (`SctpChunk.Parse` :340-341) \u2192 `SctpSackChunk.ParseChunk`. Guard: `ParseChunks` checks only `chunkLength\u003e=4` and `posn+chunkLength\u003c=length` (SctpPacket.cs:195-203). Bypass: `chunkLength=16` is well-formed; the counts are never validated.\n3. Sink: gap-ack loop (SctpSackChunk.cs:146) calls `NetConvert.ParseUInt16(buffer, reportPosn)` with `reportPosn` starting at `startPosn(16)+FIXED_PARAMETERS(12)=28`, climbing `+4` each iteration. Guard: none on the count. Bypass: `NetConvert.ParseUInt16` (NetConvert.cs:30) indexes `buffer[posn]` unchecked.\n4. Impact: at iteration 65529, `reportPosn = 28 + 65529*4 = 262144` \u2192 `buffer[262144]` \u2192 `IndexOutOfRangeException` \u2192 generic `catch` at RTCSctpTransport.cs:356 \u2192 `break` \u2192 receive thread exits, no restart \u2192 association permanently dead.\n\n## Bypass Evidence\n- Unchecked counts at SctpSackChunk.cs:141-142; loops at :146,:154.\n- `NetConvert.ParseUInt16` unchecked indexing (NetConvert.cs:30).\n- `ParseChunks` validates only `chunkLength` (SctpPacket.cs:195-203).\n- OOB math: `28 + 65535*4 = 262168 \u003e 262144`; buffer is 262144 (`DEFAULT_ADVERTISED_RECEIVE_WINDOW`, SctpAssociation.cs:62). `numGapAckBlocks` alone suffices \u2014 the dup-TSN loop is not needed.\n- `DoReceive` catch split: recoverable `catch(ApplicationException)` at :345 (`continue`) vs generic `catch(Exception)` at :356 (`break`); `_receiveThread` started once at :176.\n\n## Affected Versions\n`nuget:SIPSorcery \u003c= 10.0.13` (verified present on release tag v10.0.13 and HEAD da944543).\n\n## Dedup\nNOT a duplicate of GHSA-qmvg-569h-hqrh \u2014 that fix (`fe5a1fa`) touched only `SctpPacket.cs` (the chunk-cursor zero-length infinite loop, CWE-835). This is a distinct out-of-bounds read (CWE-125) in `SctpSackChunk` count loops, untouched by that fix.\n\n## Suggested Fix\nValidate `startPosn + FIXED_PARAMETERS_LENGTH + numGapAckBlocks*4 + numDuplicateTSNs*4 \u003c= posn + chunkLen` before the loops, and/or make `NetConvert.Parse*` bounds-checked, and/or treat `IndexOutOfRangeException`/`ArgumentException` as recoverable in `DoReceive`.\n\n---\nReported by **zx (Jace)** \u2014 GitHub: @manus-use",
  "id": "GHSA-jwjp-4649-v8jp",
  "modified": "2026-08-12T19:30:43Z",
  "published": "2026-08-12T19:30:43Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/sipsorcery-org/sipsorcery/security/advisories/GHSA-jwjp-4649-v8jp"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/sipsorcery-org/sipsorcery/commit/a2466550bb2a28821c73fb1961bc33dcc467f8cf"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/sipsorcery-org/sipsorcery"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "SIPSorcery vulnerable to Denial of Service via out-of-bounds read in SCTP SACK chunk parsing"
}

GHSA-JWJR-3XG2-2XRV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 02:19 – Updated: 2022-05-17 02:19
VLAI
Details

The put_chars function in html_r.c in Twibright Links 2.14 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (buffer over-read) via a crafted HTML file.

Severity
5.5 (Medium)
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2017-11114"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2017-07-31T13:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The put_chars function in html_r.c in Twibright Links 2.14 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (buffer over-read) via a crafted HTML file.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwjr-3xg2-2xrv",
  "modified": "2022-05-17T02:19:46Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T02:19:46Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-11114"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2017/Jul/76"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWMP-CWR7-4X96

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-02-16 21:30 – Updated: 2023-03-06 18:30
VLAI
Details

Out of bounds read in firmware for OpenBMC in some Intel(R) platforms before version 0.72 may allow unauthenticated user to potentially enable denial of service via network access.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-35729"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-02-16T21:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Out of bounds read in firmware for OpenBMC in some Intel(R) platforms before version 0.72 may allow unauthenticated user to potentially enable denial of service via network access.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwmp-cwr7-4x96",
  "modified": "2023-03-06T18:30:21Z",
  "published": "2023-02-16T21:30:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-35729"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00737.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWR7-6733-GHP8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-04-13 00:00 – Updated: 2022-04-20 00:00
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability has been identified in SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (230V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (230V, coated), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (24V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (24V, coated), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 230V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 230V, coated), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 24V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 24V, coated), SCALANCE X304-2FE, SCALANCE X306-1LD FE, SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (230V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (230V, coated), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (24V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (24V, coated), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 230V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 230V, coated), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 24V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 24V, coated), SCALANCE X307-3, SCALANCE X307-3, SCALANCE X307-3LD, SCALANCE X307-3LD, SCALANCE X308-2, SCALANCE X308-2, SCALANCE X308-2LD, SCALANCE X308-2LD, SCALANCE X308-2LH, SCALANCE X308-2LH, SCALANCE X308-2LH+, SCALANCE X308-2LH+, SCALANCE X308-2M, SCALANCE X308-2M, SCALANCE X308-2M PoE, SCALANCE X308-2M PoE, SCALANCE X308-2M TS, SCALANCE X308-2M TS, SCALANCE X310, SCALANCE X310, SCALANCE X310FE, SCALANCE X310FE, SCALANCE X320-1 FE, SCALANCE X320-1-2LD FE, SCALANCE X408-2, SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M TS (24V), SCALANCE XR324-12M TS (24V), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (230V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (230V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE TS (24V, ports on front), SIPLUS NET SCALANCE X308-2. Affected devices do not properly validate if a certain SNMP key exists. An attacker could use this to trigger a reboot of an affected device by requesting specific SNMP information from the device.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-26380"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-125"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-04-12T09:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability has been identified in SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (230V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (230V, coated), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (24V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (24V, coated), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 230V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 230V, coated), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 24V), SCALANCE X302-7 EEC (2x 24V, coated), SCALANCE X304-2FE, SCALANCE X306-1LD FE, SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (230V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (230V, coated), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (24V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (24V, coated), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 230V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 230V, coated), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 24V), SCALANCE X307-2 EEC (2x 24V, coated), SCALANCE X307-3, SCALANCE X307-3, SCALANCE X307-3LD, SCALANCE X307-3LD, SCALANCE X308-2, SCALANCE X308-2, SCALANCE X308-2LD, SCALANCE X308-2LD, SCALANCE X308-2LH, SCALANCE X308-2LH, SCALANCE X308-2LH+, SCALANCE X308-2LH+, SCALANCE X308-2M, SCALANCE X308-2M, SCALANCE X308-2M PoE, SCALANCE X308-2M PoE, SCALANCE X308-2M TS, SCALANCE X308-2M TS, SCALANCE X310, SCALANCE X310, SCALANCE X310FE, SCALANCE X310FE, SCALANCE X320-1 FE, SCALANCE X320-1-2LD FE, SCALANCE X408-2, SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M (230V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-12M TS (24V), SCALANCE XR324-12M TS (24V), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 100-240VAC/60-250VDC, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M EEC (2x 24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (230V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (230V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (24V, ports on front), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE (24V, ports on rear), SCALANCE XR324-4M PoE TS (24V, ports on front), SIPLUS NET SCALANCE X308-2. Affected devices do not properly validate if a certain SNMP key exists. An attacker could use this to trigger a reboot of an affected device by requesting specific SNMP information from the device.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwr7-6733-ghp8",
  "modified": "2022-04-20T00:00:51Z",
  "published": "2022-04-13T00:00:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-26380"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-836527.pdf"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}
Mitigation MIT-5
Implementation

Strategy: Input Validation

  • 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.
Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Language Selection

Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.

CAPEC-540: Overread Buffers

An adversary attacks a target by providing input that causes an application to read beyond the boundary of a defined buffer. This typically occurs when a value influencing where to start or stop reading is set to reflect positions outside of the valid memory location of the buffer. This type of attack may result in exposure of sensitive information, a system crash, or arbitrary code execution.

← Back to the CWE list