Bug 2027459 (CVE-2019-8922)

Summary: CVE-2019-8922 bluez: heap-based buffer overflow via crafted request
Product: [Other] Security Response Reporter: Guilherme de Almeida Suckevicz <gsuckevi>
Component: vulnerabilityAssignee: Nobody <nobody>
Status: NEW --- QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: unspecifiedCC: bdettelb, bnocera, darcari, dwmw2, dzickus, hwkernel-mgr, spacewar
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Security
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: bluez 5.49 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
A heap-based buffer overflow was discovered in bluetoothd in bluez through version 5.48. A missing check on whether there is enough space in the destination buffer can allow an attacker to exploit the vulnerability by crafting a request where the response is large enough to overflow the preallocated buffer.
 Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 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: 2031791    
Bug Blocks: 2027460    

Description Guilherme de Almeida Suckevicz 2021-11-29 17:45:31 UTC 
A heap-based buffer overflow was discovered in bluetoothd in BlueZ through 5.48. There isn't any check on whether there is enough space in the destination buffer. The function simply appends all data passed to it. The values of all attributes that are requested are appended to the output buffer. There are no size checks whatsoever, resulting in a simple heap overflow if one can craft a request where the response is large enough to overflow the preallocated buffer. This issue exists in service_attr_req gets called by process_request (in sdpd-request.c), which also allocates the response buffer.

Reference:
https://ssd-disclosure.com/ssd-advisory-linux-bluez-information-leak-and-heap-overflow/
Comment 1 Peter Robinson 2021-11-29 22:23:48 UTC 
As per you note this was vulnerable "through 5.48". We build 5.49 for Fedora 27/28/29 on Mar 20 2018, this CVE has been fixed for nearly 4 years in Fedora why is this being opened now?
Comment 2 Peter Robinson 2021-11-29 22:32:23 UTC 
Actually it looks like el8 is 5.56-2.el8 so it looks like this is fixed in RHEL-8 too
Comment 3 Guilherme de Almeida Suckevicz 2021-11-30 17:01:31 UTC 
In reply to comment #1:
> As per you note this was vulnerable "through 5.48". We build 5.49 for Fedora
> 27/28/29 on Mar 20 2018, this CVE has been fixed for nearly 4 years in
> Fedora why is this being opened now?

Hi, this is a flaw bug and it's used to track all Red Hat products that may be affected by this issue, it's not just for Fedora.