Bug 1645957 (CVE-2018-18483)
| Summary: | CVE-2018-18483 binutils: Integer overflow in cplus-dem.c:get_count() allows for denial of service | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Other] Security Response | Reporter: | Sam Fowler <sfowler> |
| Component: | vulnerability | Assignee: | Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | unspecified | CC: | abhgupta, dbaker, dvlasenk, erik-fedora, fweimer, jakub, jokerman, kanderso, klember, mcermak, mnewsome, mpolacek, nickc, ohudlick, rjones, security-response-team, sthangav, trankin, trupti_pardeshi, virt-maint, yselkowi |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Security |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: |
A vulnerability was found in GNU libiberty, as distributed in GNU Binutils, where an integer overflow in the get_count function in cplus-dem.c could lead to a denial of service or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted string, as demonstrated by c++filt.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2021-10-25 22:21:19 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: | 1645961, 1645963, 1645965, 1645966, 1650333, 1653849, 1654027 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 1647427 | ||
|
Description
Sam Fowler
2018-11-05 05:14:31 UTC
Created binutils tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-all [bug 1645961] Created mingw-binutils tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: epel-all [bug 1645963] Trivial to reproduce, binutils220 does not package c++filt. Can someone please help to know whether GCC of RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 are affected by this issue? If yes, whether fix will be provided in which version of GCC for RHEL 5 and RHEL 6? Any heads up are much appreciated. Thanks in advance. Best Regards, (In reply to Trupti Pardeshi from comment #9) > Can someone please help to know whether GCC of RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 are > affected by this issue? Yes they are. (Although to be clear it is the binutils packages for RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 which are most affected by the problem, even though the bug is in the libiberty library which part of the GCC project). > If yes, whether fix will be provided in which > version of GCC for RHEL 5 and RHEL 6? Currently there are no plans to provide a fix for this CVE. Since the problem only manifests in 32-bit environments, and only when asked to demangle a specially created, corrupt name, there does not appear to be a pressing need to create a fix for this problem. (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #10) > (In reply to Trupti Pardeshi from comment #9) > > Can someone please help to know whether GCC of RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 are > > affected by this issue? > > Yes they are. (Although to be clear it is the binutils packages for RHEL 5 > and RHEL 6 which are most affected by the problem, even though the bug is in > the libiberty library which part of the GCC project). > > > If yes, whether fix will be provided in which > > version of GCC for RHEL 5 and RHEL 6? > > Currently there are no plans to provide a fix for this CVE. > > Since the problem only manifests in 32-bit environments, and only when asked > to demangle a specially created, corrupt name, there does not appear to be a > pressing need to create a fix for this problem. Thank you so much Nick for prompt and clear reply. |