Bug 1052863 (CVE-2013-7290)

Summary:	CVE-2013-7290 memcached: remote DoS (segmentation fault) via a request to delete a key
Product:	[Other] Security Response	Reporter:	Ratul Gupta <ratulg>
Component:	vulnerability	Assignee:	Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	unspecified	CC:	bdunne, dajohnso, jfrey, jkurik, jorton, jrafanie, lindner, matthias, mlichvar, obarenbo, vdanen, xlecauch
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Security
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	memcached 1.4.17	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2019-06-08 02:31:16 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:	1052865, 1052866, 1052867, 1159447
Bug Blocks:	1052870

Description Ratul Gupta 2014-01-14 09:15:37 UTC

Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures assigned an identifier CVE-2013-7290 to the following vulnerability:

Name: CVE-2013-7290
URL: http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2013-7290
Assigned: 20140110
Reference: https://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=306
Reference: https://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes1417

The do_item_get function in items.c in memcached 1.4.4 and other versions before 1.4.17, when running in verbose mode, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (segmentation fault) via a request to delete a key, which does not account for the lack of a null terminator in the key and triggers a buffer over-read when printing to stderr, a different vulnerability than CVE-2013-0179.

Comment 2 Ratul Gupta 2014-01-14 09:18:55 UTC

Created memcached tracking bugs for this issue:

Affects: fedora-all [bug 1052865]
Affects: epel-5 [bug 1052866]

Comment 7 Vincent Danen 2014-01-15 21:51:47 UTC

As per the CVE-2013-0179 bug and re-posting because of the close similarities of the flaws (from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895054#c2 ):

However, I'm not sure if we would consider this a security flaw.  For one, you need to run memcached with -vv (probably not used in production but for testing).

It would also indicate that this would be a local-only flaw (or from other trusted source) as the docs explicitly say that you shouldn't expose memcached to untrusted users:

https://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/NewConfiguringServer#Networking

In particular:

"Memcached does not spend much, if any, effort in ensuring its defensibility from random internet connections. So you must not expose memcached directly to the internet, or otherwise any untrusted users. Using SASL authentication here helps, but should not be totally trusted."

I guess this could be considered a low-impact security flaw due to the conditions required to make an attack meaningful:

- start memcached with -vv (not the default)
- make it available to untrusted users (not recommended as per docs)
- memcached runs non-root and with FORTIFY_SOURCE/SSP any buffer overflow should be rendered a simple DoS

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2014-02-03 02:42:42 UTC

memcached-1.4.17-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2014-02-03 02:49:08 UTC

memcached-1.4.17-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.