Bug 1657582

Summary:

glibc: Integer overflow in realloc() allows for uninitialized memory

Product:

[Other] Security Response

Reporter:

Sam Fowler <sfowler>

Component:

vulnerability

Assignee:

Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team>

Status:

CLOSED NOTABUG

QA Contact:

Severity:

low

Docs Contact:

Priority:

low

Version:

unspecified

CC:

abhgupta, amaris, aoliva, arjun.is, ashankar, bmcclain, codonell, dbaker, dblechte, dfediuck, dj, eedri, fweimer, glibc-bugzilla, jokerman, law, mfabian, mgoldboi, michal.skrivanek, mnewsome, nh2-redhatbugzilla, pfrankli, rth, sbonazzo, security-response-team, sherold, siddhesh, sthangav, tcallawa, trankin

Target Milestone:

---

Keywords:

Security

Target Release:

---

Hardware:

All

OS:

Linux

Whiteboard:

Fixed In Version:

Doc Type:

If docs needed, set a value

Doc Text:

Story Points:

---

Clone Of:

Environment:

Last Closed:

2018-12-17 14:07:40 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:

1662841, 1662842, 1662843

Bug Blocks:

1657583

Attachments:

Description	Flags
Proposed patch	none

Description Sam Fowler 2018-12-10 03:08:10 UTC

glibc is vulnerable to an integer overflow when a malloc(>= 32 GiB) is increased via realloc() (and M_MMAP_THRESHOLD is set very large or mmap() based allocation is disabled entirely by setting M_MMAP_MAX=0). Only the first couple bytes of the buffer are copied, potentially leaving the majority of the returned buffer with unititialised memory instead of the original malloc()ed buffer's contents.  This may turn into a security problem if you rely on realloc() preserving the contents you wrote into the buffer after malloc().

Comment 1 Sam Fowler 2018-12-10 04:39:39 UTC

Acknowledgments:

Name: Niklas Hambüchen

Comment 2 Sam Fowler 2018-12-10 04:47:12 UTC

Created attachment 1512947 [details]
Proposed patch

Comment 12 Adam Mariš 2018-12-17 14:07:42 UTC

Statement:

Red Hat Product Security does not consider this bug a vulnerability due to unlikelihood of exploiting this issue to cause a security impact.

Comment 13 nh2 2018-12-22 21:21:37 UTC

Upstream issue at https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24027