CVE-2015-1283
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
The CVE Program describes this issue as:
Multiple integer overflows in the XML_GetBuffer function in Expat through 2.1.0, as used in Google Chrome before 44.0.2403.89 and other products, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap-based buffer overflow) or possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted XML data, a related issue to CVE-2015-2716.
Additional information
- Bugzilla 1245587: chromium-browser: Heap-buffer-overflow in expat.
- CWE-122: Heap-based Buffer Overflow
- FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2015-1283
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).
| Red Hat | NVD | |
|---|---|---|
CVSS v2 Base Score | 6.8 | 6.8 |
Attack Vector | Network | Network |
Access Complexity | Medium | Medium |
Authentication | None | None |
Confidentiality Impact | Partial | Partial |
Integrity Impact | Partial | Partial |
Availability Impact | Partial | Partial |
CVSS v2 Vector
Red Hat: AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
NVD: AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
Buffer overflows generally lead to crashes. Other attacks leading to lack of availability are possible, including putting the program into an infinite loop.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability,Access Control
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Bypass Protection Mechanism; Modify Memory
Buffer overflows often can be used to execute arbitrary code, which is usually outside the scope of a program's implicit security policy. Besides important user data, heap-based overflows can be used to overwrite function pointers that may be living in memory, pointing it to the attacker's code. Even in applications that do not explicitly use function pointers, the run-time will usually leave many in memory. For example, object methods in C++ are generally implemented using function pointers. Even in C programs, there is often a global offset table used by the underlying runtime.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability,Access Control,Other
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Bypass Protection Mechanism; Other
When the consequence is arbitrary code execution, this can often be used to subvert any other security service.
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?
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
