Portée | Impact | Probabilité |
---|---|---|
Availability | DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart, DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU), DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory) Note: Buffer overflows generally lead to crashes. Other attacks leading to lack of availability are possible, including putting the program into an infinite loop. | |
Integrity Confidentiality Availability Access Control | Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands, Bypass Protection Mechanism, Modify Memory Note: Buffer overflows often can be used to execute arbitrary code, which is usually outside the scope of a program's implicit security policy. Besides important user data, heap-based overflows can be used to overwrite function pointers that may be living in memory, pointing it to the attacker's code. Even in applications that do not explicitly use function pointers, the run-time will usually leave many in memory. For example, object methods in C++ are generally implemented using function pointers. Even in C programs, there is often a global offset table used by the underlying runtime. | |
Integrity Confidentiality Availability Access Control Other | Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands, Bypass Protection Mechanism, Other Note: When the consequence is arbitrary code execution, this can often be used to subvert any other security service. |
Références | Description |
---|---|
CVE-2021-43537 | Chain: in a web browser, an unsigned 64-bit integer is forcibly cast to a 32-bit integer (CWE-681) and potentially leading to an integer overflow (CWE-190). If an integer overflow occurs, this can cause heap memory corruption (CWE-122) |
CVE-2007-4268 | Chain: integer signedness error (CWE-195) passes signed comparison, leading to heap overflow (CWE-122) |
CVE-2009-2523 | Chain: product does not handle when an input string is not NULL terminated (CWE-170), leading to buffer over-read (CWE-125) or heap-based buffer overflow (CWE-122). |
CVE-2021-29529 | Chain: machine-learning product can have a heap-based buffer overflow (CWE-122) when some integer-oriented bounds are calculated by using ceiling() and floor() on floating point values (CWE-1339) |
CVE-2010-1866 | Chain: integer overflow (CWE-190) causes a negative signed value, which later bypasses a maximum-only check (CWE-839), leading to heap-based buffer overflow (CWE-122). |
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.
D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.
Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program's executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.
Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as "rebasing" (for Windows) and "prelinking" (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.
For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].
CAPEC-ID | Nom du modèle d'attaque |
---|---|
CAPEC-92 | Forced Integer Overflow This attack forces an integer variable to go out of range. The integer variable is often used as an offset such as size of memory allocation or similarly. The attacker would typically control the value of such variable and try to get it out of range. For instance the integer in question is incremented past the maximum possible value, it may wrap to become a very small, or negative number, therefore providing a very incorrect value which can lead to unexpected behavior. At worst the attacker can execute arbitrary code. |
Nom | Organisation | Date | Date de publication | Version |
---|---|---|---|---|
CLASP | Draft 3 |
Nom | Organisation | Date | Commentaire |
---|---|---|---|
Eric Dalci | Cigital | updated Potential_Mitigations, Time_of_Introduction | |
KDM Analytics | added/updated white box definitions | ||
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Relationships, Other_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings, Weakness_Ordinalities | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences, Other_Notes, Relationship_Notes | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences, Relationships | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Demonstrative_Examples, References, Relationships | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Demonstrative_Examples | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Demonstrative_Examples, Potential_Mitigations | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Causal_Nature, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Observed_Examples, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings, White_Box_Definitions | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Detection_Factors, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Mapping_Notes | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples, Taxonomy_Mappings |