CVE-2022-48622

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

Description

A flaw was found in GNOME's GdkPixbuf library, a library used to load image data in various formats used by GDK for handling graphical assets. This issue occurs when loading a crafted ANI (animated cursor file) file, which may lead to a heap based out-of-bounds write, causing memory corruption. When a successful attack is in place, it can lead to a denial of service or in some cases arbitrary code execution.

A flaw was found in GNOME's GdkPixbuf library, a library used to load image data in various formats used by GDK for handling graphical assets. This issue occurs when loading a crafted ANI (animated cursor file) file, which may lead to a heap based out-of-bounds write, causing memory corruption. When a successful attack is in place, it can lead to a denial of service or in some cases arbitrary code execution.

Statement

The vulnerability in the GdkPixbuf library, allowing for heap-based out-of-bounds writes when loading crafted ANI files, poses a moderate severity risk. While the flaw could lead to memory corruption and potential denial of service or arbitrary code execution, its impact is somewhat mitigated by factors such as the need for the attacker to craft specifically malicious ANI files and the requirement for user interaction to open these files. Additionally, exploitation is limited to systems where GdkPixbuf is used to handle ANI files, reducing the overall attack surface.

The vulnerability in the GdkPixbuf library, allowing for heap-based out-of-bounds writes when loading crafted ANI files, poses a moderate severity risk. While the flaw could lead to memory corruption and potential denial of service or arbitrary code execution, its impact is somewhat mitigated by factors such as the need for the attacker to craft specifically malicious ANI files and the requirement for user interaction to open these files. Additionally, exploitation is limited to systems where GdkPixbuf is used to handle ANI files, reducing the overall attack surface.

Mitigation

This flaw can be mitigated by the user avoiding to load .ani files from untrusted sources.

Additional information

  • Bugzilla 2260545: gnome: heap memory corruption on gdk-pixbuf
  • CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write
  • FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2022-48622

Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details

Important note

CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
Red HatNVD

CVSS v3 Base Score

7.3

7.8

Attack Vector

Local

Local

Attack Complexity

Low

Low

Privileges Required

Low

None

User Interaction

Required

Required

Scope

Unchanged

Unchanged

Confidentiality Impact

High

High

Integrity Impact

High

High

Availability Impact

High

High

CVSS v3 Vector

Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Understanding the Weakness (CWE)

CWE-787

Integrity

Technical Impact: Modify Memory; Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands

Write operations could cause memory corruption. In some cases, an adversary can modify control data such as return addresses in order to execute unexpected code.

Availability

Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Attempting to access out-of-range, invalid, or unauthorized memory could cause the product to crash.

Other

Technical Impact: Unexpected State

Subsequent write operations can produce undefined or unexpected results.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

What is a mitigation?

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.