ghsa-vhq5-x52q-wx75
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-13 01:43
Modified
2022-05-13 01:43
Severity ?
Details
dwarf1.c in the Binary File Descriptor (BFD) library (aka libbfd), as distributed in GNU Binutils 2.29, mishandles pointers, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted ELF file, related to parse_die and parse_line_table, as demonstrated by a parse_die heap-based buffer over-read.
{ affected: [], aliases: [ "CVE-2017-15020", ], database_specific: { cwe_ids: [ "CWE-125", ], github_reviewed: false, github_reviewed_at: null, nvd_published_at: "2017-10-05T01:29:00Z", severity: "HIGH", }, details: "dwarf1.c in the Binary File Descriptor (BFD) library (aka libbfd), as distributed in GNU Binutils 2.29, mishandles pointers, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted ELF file, related to parse_die and parse_line_table, as demonstrated by a parse_die heap-based buffer over-read.", id: "GHSA-vhq5-x52q-wx75", modified: "2022-05-13T01:43:37Z", published: "2022-05-13T01:43:37Z", references: [ { type: "ADVISORY", url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-15020", }, { type: "WEB", url: "https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2017/10/03/binutils-heap-based-buffer-overflow-in-parse_die-dwarf1-c", }, { type: "WEB", url: "https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22202", }, { type: "WEB", url: "https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=1da5c9a485f3dcac4c45e96ef4b7dae5948314b5", }, ], schema_version: "1.4.0", severity: [ { score: "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", type: "CVSS_V3", }, ], }
Log in or create an account to share your comment.
Security Advisory comment format.
This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.