An array indexing error was found in the way xpdf / poppler parsed Type1 fonts embedded in PDF documents. In FoFiType1::parse(), text representation of the numeric code value was converted to integer value using atoi(). This value was checked to ensure it's less than 256, but there was no check to ensure it's not negative (string passed to atoi() was checked to only contain characters '0'-'9' before the call though). On platforms, where atoi() could return negative result when parsing large positive values (exceeding INT_MAX), this could could lead to write out of array bounds due to use of negative index. poppler upstream commit: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/poppler/poppler/commit/?id=39d140bfc0b8239bdd96d6a55842034ae5c05473 Reference: http://secunia.com/advisories/41596/
(In reply to comment #0) > On platforms, where atoi() could return negative result when parsing large > positive values (exceeding INT_MAX), this could could lead to write out of > array bounds due to use of negative index. This does happen on e.g. x86_64, but does not happen on i386. Affected code is present in xpdf versions 3.00 and later, it is not part of xpdf 2.x (so EL3 is not affected, EL4 tetex is not affected).
Created poppler tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 639861]
This is likely to affect other applications that embed xpdf code, such as pdfedit and koffice 1.x. Official xpdf patch may appear later this week.
This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Via RHSA-2010:0749 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0749.html
This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Via RHSA-2010:0751 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0751.html
This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Via RHSA-2010:0752 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0752.html
This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Via RHSA-2010:0753 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0753.html
xpdf upstream fixed this via xpdf-3.02pl5.patch, see bug #595245, comment #22.
This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Via RHSA-2010:0859 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0859.html
This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Via RHSA-2012:1201 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1201.html