CVE-2019-13590
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
The CVE Program describes this issue as:
An issue was discovered in libsox.a in SoX 14.4.2. In sox-fmt.h (startread function), there is an integer overflow on the result of integer addition (wraparound to 0) fed into the lsx_calloc macro that wraps malloc. When a NULL pointer is returned, it is used without a prior check that it is a valid pointer, leading to a NULL pointer dereference on lsx_readbuf in formats_i.c.
Statement
This is only an issue when using the 32bit version of the library.
Additional information
- Bugzilla 1737764: sox: integer overflow in libsox.a leading to a NULL pointer dereference
- CWE-190->CWE-476: Integer Overflow or Wraparound leads to NULL Pointer Dereference
- FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2019-13590
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).
The following CVSS metrics and score provided are preliminary and subject to review.
| Red Hat | NVD | |
|---|---|---|
CVSS v3 Base Score | 3.3 | 5.5 |
Attack Vector | Local | Local |
Attack Complexity | Low | Low |
Privileges Required | None | None |
User Interaction | Required | Required |
Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged |
Confidentiality Impact | None | None |
Integrity Impact | None | None |
Availability Impact | Low | High |
CVSS v3 Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory); DoS: Instability
This weakness can generally lead to undefined behavior and therefore crashes. When the calculated result is used for resource allocation, this weakness can cause too many (or too few) resources to be allocated, possibly enabling crashes if the product requests more resources than can be provided.
Integrity
Technical Impact: Modify Memory
If the value in question is important to data (as opposed to flow), simple data corruption has occurred. Also, if the overflow/wraparound results in other conditions such as buffer overflows, further memory corruption may occur.
Confidentiality,Availability,Access Control
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Bypass Protection Mechanism
This weakness can sometimes trigger buffer overflows, which can be used to execute arbitrary code. This is usually outside the scope of the product's implicit security policy.
Availability,Other
Technical Impact: Alter Execution Logic; DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)
If the overflow/wraparound occurs in a loop index variable, this could cause the loop to terminate at the wrong time - too early, too late, or not at all (i.e., infinite loops). With too many iterations, some loops could consume too many resources such as memory, file handles, etc., possibly leading to a crash or other DoS.
Access Control
Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism
If integer values are used in security-critical decisions, such as calculating quotas or allocation limits, integer overflows can be used to cause an incorrect security decision.
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
NULL pointer dereferences usually result in the failure of the process unless exception handling (on some platforms) is available and implemented. Even when exception handling is being used, it can still be very difficult to return the software to a safe state of operation.
Integrity,Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Read Memory; Modify Memory
In rare circumstances, when NULL is equivalent to the 0x0 memory address and privileged code can access it, then writing or reading memory is possible, which may lead to code execution.
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?
My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
