CVE-2017-6060 : Detail

CVE-2017-6060

7.8
/
High
Overflow
0.53%V3
Local
2017-03-15
13h00 +00:00
2024-09-13
16h16 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Stack-based buffer overflow in jstest_main.c in mujstest in Artifex Software, Inc. MuPDF 1.10a allows remote attackers to have unspecified impact via a crafted image.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-787 Out-of-bounds Write
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

Required

Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited. For example, a successful exploit may only be possible during the installation of an application by a system administrator.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

nvd@nist.gov
V2 6.8 AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

Exploit information

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 42139

Publication date : 2017-02-16 23h00 +00:00
Author : Agostino Sarubbo
EDB Verified : Yes

Source: http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2017/q1/458 Description: Mujstest, which is part of mupdf is a scriptable tester for mupdf + js. A crafted image posted early for another issue, causes a stack overflow. The complete ASan output: # mujstest $FILE ==32127==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7fff29560b00 at pc 0x00000047cbf3 bp 0x7fff29560630 sp 0x7fff2955fde0 WRITE of size 1453 at 0x7fff29560b00 thread T0 #0 0x47cbf2 in __interceptor_strcpy /tmp/portage/sys-devel/llvm-3.9.1- r1/work/llvm-3.9.1.src/projects/compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_interceptors.cc:548 #1 0x50e903 in main /tmp/portage/app-text/mupdf-1.10a/work/mupdf-1.10a- source/platform/x11/jstest_main.c:358:7 #2 0x7f68df3c578f in __libc_start_main /tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.23- r3/work/glibc-2.23/csu/../csu/libc-start.c:289 #3 0x41bc18 in _init (/usr/bin/mujstest+0x41bc18) Address 0x7fff29560b00 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 1056 in frame #0 0x50c45f in main /tmp/portage/app-text/mupdf-1.10a/work/mupdf-1.10a- source/platform/x11/jstest_main.c:293 This frame has 7 object(s): [32, 1056) 'path' [1184, 2208) 'text' <== Memory access at offset 1056 partially underflows this variable [2336, 2340) 'w' <== Memory access at offset 1056 partially underflows this variable [2352, 2356) 'h' <== Memory access at offset 1056 partially underflows this variable [2368, 2372) 'x' <== Memory access at offset 1056 partially underflows this variable [2384, 2388) 'y' <== Memory access at offset 1056 partially underflows this variable [2400, 2404) 'b' 0x1000652a4160:[f2]f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 0x1000652a4170: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0x1000652a4180: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0x1000652a4190: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0x1000652a41a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0x1000652a41b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes): Addressable: 00 Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 Heap left redzone: fa Heap right redzone: fb Freed heap region: fd Stack left redzone: f1 Stack mid redzone: f2 Stack right redzone: f3 Stack partial redzone: f4 Stack after return: f5 Stack use after scope: f8 Global redzone: f9 Global init order: f6 Poisoned by user: f7 Container overflow: fc Array cookie: ac Intra object redzone: bb ASan internal: fe Left alloca redzone: ca Right alloca redzone: cb ==32127==ABORTING Affected version: 1.10a Fixed version: N/A Commit fix: N/A Credit: This bug was discovered by Agostino Sarubbo of Gentoo. CVE: CVE-2017-6060 Reproducer: https://github.com/asarubbo/poc/blob/master/00147-mupdf-mujstest-stackoverflow-main Timeline: 2017-02-05: bug discovered and reported to upstream 2017-02-17: blog post about the issue 2017-02-17: CVE assigned via cveform.mitre.org Note: This bug was found with Address Sanitizer. Permalink: https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2017/02/17/mupdf-mujstest-stack-based-buffer-overflow-in-main-jstest_main-c Proof of Concept: https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/42139.zip

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Artifex>>Mupdf >> Version 1.10a

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 9.0

References

https://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697551
Tags : Exploit, Third Party Advisory