CVE-2016-3710 : Détail

CVE-2016-3710

8.8
/
Haute
Overflow
0.2%V3
Local
2016-05-11
19h00 +00:00
2018-01-04
18h57 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

The VGA module in QEMU improperly performs bounds checking on banked access to video memory, which allows local guest OS administrators to execute arbitrary code on the host by changing access modes after setting the bank register, aka the "Dark Portal" issue.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-119 Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer
The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it reads from or writes to a memory location outside the buffer's intended boundary. This may result in read or write operations on unexpected memory locations that could be linked to other variables, data structures, or internal program data.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 8.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

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.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

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.

Changed

An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.

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.

 [email protected]
V2 7.2 AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

Score EPSS

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

Percentile EPSS

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 8.0

Configuraton 0

Hp>>Helion_openstack >> Version 2.0.0

Hp>>Helion_openstack >> Version 2.1.0

Hp>>Helion_openstack >> Version 2.1.2

Hp>>Helion_openstack >> Version 2.1.4

Configuraton 0

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 12.04

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 14.04

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 15.10

Canonical>>Ubuntu_linux >> Version 16.04

Configuraton 0

Qemu>>Qemu >> Version To (including) 2.5.1

Qemu>>Qemu >> Version 2.6.0

Qemu>>Qemu >> Version 2.6.0

Qemu>>Qemu >> Version 2.6.0

Qemu>>Qemu >> Version 2.6.0

Qemu>>Qemu >> Version 2.6.0

Configuraton 0

Oracle>>Vm_server >> Version 3.2

Oracle>>Vm_server >> Version 3.3

Oracle>>Vm_server >> Version 3.4

Oracle>>Linux >> Version 5

Oracle>>Linux >> Version 6

Oracle>>Linux >> Version 7

Configuraton 0

Citrix>>Xenserver >> Version To (including) 7.0

Configuraton 0

Redhat>>Openstack >> Version 5.0

Redhat>>Openstack >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Openstack >> Version 7.0

Redhat>>Openstack >> Version 8

Redhat>>Virtualization >> Version 3.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_desktop >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_desktop >> Version 7.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server >> Version 7.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.2

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.3

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.4

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_aus >> Version 7.6

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_eus >> Version 7.2

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_eus >> Version 7.3

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_eus >> Version 7.4

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_eus >> Version 7.5

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_eus >> Version 7.6

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_eus >> Version 7.7

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.2

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.3

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.6

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_server_tus >> Version 7.7

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_workstation >> Version 6.0

Redhat>>Enterprise_linux_workstation >> Version 7.0

Références

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0999.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/90316
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_BID
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0725.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1000.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1002.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1001.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0997.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1035794
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_SECTRACK
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1943.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1019.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/USN-2974-1
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_UBUNTU
http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/05/09/3
Tags : mailing-list, x_refsource_MLIST
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0724.html
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016:1224
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3573
Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_DEBIAN