CVE-2017-2292
Description
From CVE.org
Versions of MCollective prior to 2.10.4 deserialized YAML from agents without calling safe_load, allowing the potential for arbitrary code execution on the server. The fix for this is to call YAML.safe_load on input. This has been tested in all Puppet-supplied MCollective plugins, but there is a chance that third-party plugins could rely on this insecure behavior.
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert: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).
The following CVSS metrics and score provided are preliminary and subject to review.
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 8.1 | 9 | N/A |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network | N/A |
| Attack Complexity | High | Low | N/A |
| Privileges Required | None | High | N/A |
| User Interaction | None | None | N/A |
| Scope | Unchanged | Changed | N/A |
| Confidentiality | High | High | N/A |
| Integrity Impact | High | High | N/A |
| Availability Impact | High | Low | N/A |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Integrity
Technical Impact: Modify Application Data; Unexpected State
Attackers can modify unexpected objects or data that was assumed to be safe from modification. Deserialized data or code could be modified without using the provided accessor functions, or unexpected functions could be invoked.
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)
If a function is making an assumption on when to terminate, based on a sentry in a string, it could easily never terminate.
Other
Technical Impact: Varies by Context
The consequences can vary widely, because it depends on which objects or methods are being deserialized, and how they are used. Making an assumption that the code in the deserialized object is valid is dangerous and can enable exploitation. One example is attackers using gadget chains to perform unauthorized actions, such as generating a shell.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
