ghsa-xm77-6vqw-642h
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-13 01:46
Modified
2022-05-13 01:46
Severity ?
Details
An issue (known as XSA-212) was discovered in Xen, with fixes available for 4.8.x, 4.7.x, 4.6.x, 4.5.x, and 4.4.x. The earlier XSA-29 fix introduced an insufficient check on XENMEM_exchange input, allowing the caller to drive hypervisor memory accesses outside of the guest provided input/output arrays.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2017-7228" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [ "CWE-129" ], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2017-04-04T14:59:00Z", "severity": "HIGH" }, "details": "An issue (known as XSA-212) was discovered in Xen, with fixes available for 4.8.x, 4.7.x, 4.6.x, 4.5.x, and 4.4.x. The earlier XSA-29 fix introduced an insufficient check on XENMEM_exchange input, allowing the caller to drive hypervisor memory accesses outside of the guest provided input/output arrays.", "id": "GHSA-xm77-6vqw-642h", "modified": "2022-05-13T01:46:53Z", "published": "2022-05-13T01:46:53Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-7228" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-secpack/blob/master/QSBs/qsb-029-2017.txt" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2017/04/pandavirtualization-exploiting-xen.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/41870" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2017/04/04/3" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3847" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97375" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038223" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-212.html" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [ { "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "type": "CVSS_V3" } ] }
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.