GHSA-QQ97-VM5H-RRHG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-02-08 18:53 – Updated: 2023-02-09 15:29Impact
Systems that rely on digest equivalence for image attestations may be vulnerable to type confusion.
Patches
Upgrade to at least v2.8.0-beta.1 if you are running v2.x release. If you use the code from the main branch, update at least to the commit after b59a6f827947f9e0e67df0cfb571046de4733586.
Workarounds
There is no way to work around this issue without patching.
References
Due to an oversight in the OCI Image Specification that removed the embedded mediaType field from manifests, a maliciously crafted OCI Container Image can cause registry clients to parse the same image in two different ways without modifying the image’s digest by modifying the Content-Type header returned by a registry. This can invalidate a common pattern of relying on container image digests for equivalence.
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in distribution * Open an issue in distribution-spec * Email us at cncf-distribution-security@lists.cncf.io
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/docker/distribution"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.8.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-843"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-02-08T18:53:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nSystems that rely on digest equivalence for image attestations may be vulnerable to type confusion.\n\n### Patches\n\nUpgrade to at least `v2.8.0-beta.1` if you are running `v2.x` release. If you use the code from the `main` branch, update at least to the commit after [b59a6f827947f9e0e67df0cfb571046de4733586](https://github.com/distribution/distribution/commit/b59a6f827947f9e0e67df0cfb571046de4733586).\n\n### Workarounds\n\nThere is no way to work around this issue without patching.\n\n### References\n\nDue to [an oversight in the OCI Image Specification](https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/pull/411) that removed the embedded `mediaType` field from manifests, a maliciously crafted OCI Container Image can cause registry clients to parse the same image in two different ways without modifying the image\u2019s digest by modifying the `Content-Type` header returned by a registry. This can invalidate a common pattern of relying on container image digests for equivalence.\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Open an issue in [distribution](https://github.com/distribution/distribution) \n* Open an issue in [distribution-spec](https://github.com/opencontainers/distribution-spec) \n* Email us at [cncf-distribution-security@lists.cncf.io](mailto:cncf-distribution-security@lists.cncf.io)\n",
"id": "GHSA-qq97-vm5h-rrhg",
"modified": "2023-02-09T15:29:32Z",
"published": "2022-02-08T18:53:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/distribution/distribution/security/advisories/GHSA-qq97-vm5h-rrhg"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/pull/411"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/distribution/distribution/commit/b59a6f827947f9e0e67df0cfb571046de4733586"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/distribution/distribution"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://pkg.go.dev/vuln/GO-2022-0379"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "OCI Manifest Type Confusion Issue"
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.