ID

VAR-201008-0003

CVE

CVE-2009-3743

TITLE

Ghostscript Heap Corruption in TrueType bytecode interpreter

DESCRIPTION

Off-by-one error in the Ins_MINDEX function in the TrueType bytecode interpreter in Ghostscript before 8.71 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (heap memory corruption) via a malformed TrueType font in a document that trigger an integer overflow and a heap-based buffer overflow. Ghostscript of TrueType bytecode interpreter Vulnerabilities exist. Ghostscript is a program for displaying PostScript files or printing files to non-PostScript printers. An attacker can exploit this issue to execute arbitrary code. Failed exploit attempts will likely cause denial-of-service conditions. Versions prior to Ghostscript 8.71 are vulnerable. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gentoo Linux Security Advisory GLSA 201412-17 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://security.gentoo.org/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Severity: Normal Title: GPL Ghostscript: Multiple vulnerabilities Date: December 13, 2014 Bugs: #264594, #300192, #332061, #437654 ID: 201412-17 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Synopsis ======== Multiple vulnerabilities have been found in GPL Ghostscript, the worst of which may allow execution of arbitrary code. Affected packages ================= ------------------------------------------------------------------- Package / Vulnerable / Unaffected ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 app-text/ghostscript-gpl < 9.10-r2 >= 9.10-r2 Description =========== Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in GPL Ghostscript. Please review the CVE identifiers referenced below for details. Workaround ========== There is no known workaround at this time. Resolution ========== All GPL Ghostscript users should upgrade to the latest version: # emerge --sync # emerge --ask --oneshot -v ">=app-text/ghostscript-gpl-9.10-r2" References ========== [ 1 ] CVE-2009-0196 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2009-0196 [ 2 ] CVE-2009-0792 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2009-0792 [ 3 ] CVE-2009-3743 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2009-3743 [ 4 ] CVE-2009-4270 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2009-4270 [ 5 ] CVE-2009-4897 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2009-4897 [ 6 ] CVE-2010-1628 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2010-1628 [ 7 ] CVE-2010-2055 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2010-2055 [ 8 ] CVE-2010-4054 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2010-4054 [ 9 ] CVE-2012-4405 http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2012-4405 Availability ============ This GLSA and any updates to it are available for viewing at the Gentoo Security Website: http://security.gentoo.org/glsa/glsa-201412-17.xml Concerns? ========= Security is a primary focus of Gentoo Linux and ensuring the confidentiality and security of our users' machines is of utmost importance to us. Any security concerns should be addressed to security@gentoo.org or alternatively, you may file a bug at https://bugs.gentoo.org. License ======= Copyright 2014 Gentoo Foundation, Inc; referenced text belongs to its owner(s). The contents of this document are licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution / Share Alike license. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5 . -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ===================================================================== Red Hat Security Advisory Synopsis: Moderate: ghostscript security update Advisory ID: RHSA-2012:0095-01 Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Advisory URL: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-0095.html Issue date: 2012-02-02 CVE Names: CVE-2009-3743 CVE-2010-2055 CVE-2010-4054 CVE-2010-4820 ===================================================================== 1. Summary: Updated ghostscript packages that fix multiple security issues are now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 and 6. The Red Hat Security Response Team has rated this update as having moderate security impact. Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base scores, which give detailed severity ratings, are available for each vulnerability from the CVE links in the References section. 2. Relevant releases/architectures: RHEL Desktop Workstation (v. 5 client) - i386, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux (v. 5 server) - i386, ia64, ppc, s390x, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop (v. 5 client) - i386, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop (v. 6) - i386, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop Optional (v. 6) - i386, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node (v. 6) - x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node Optional (v. 6) - x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (v. 6) - i386, ppc64, s390x, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server Optional (v. 6) - i386, ppc64, s390x, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation (v. 6) - i386, x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation Optional (v. 6) - i386, x86_64 3. Description: Ghostscript is a set of software that provides a PostScript interpreter, a set of C procedures (the Ghostscript library, which implements the graphics capabilities in the PostScript language) and an interpreter for Portable Document Format (PDF) files. An attacker could create a specially-crafted PostScript or PDF file that, when interpreted, could cause Ghostscript to crash or, potentially, execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2009-3743) It was found that Ghostscript always tried to read Ghostscript system initialization files from the current working directory before checking other directories, even if a search path that did not contain the current working directory was specified with the "-I" option, or the "-P-" option was used (to prevent the current working directory being searched first). (CVE-2010-2055) Ghostscript included the current working directory in its library search path by default. If a user ran Ghostscript without the "-P-" option in an attacker-controlled directory containing a specially-crafted PostScript library file, it could cause Ghostscript to execute arbitrary PostScript code. With this update, Ghostscript no longer searches the current working directory for library files by default. (CVE-2010-4820) Note: The fix for CVE-2010-4820 could possibly break existing configurations. To use the previous, vulnerable behavior, run Ghostscript with the "-P" option (to always search the current working directory first). An attacker could create a specially-crafted PostScript Type 1 or PostScript Type 2 font file that, when interpreted, could cause Ghostscript to crash or, potentially, execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2010-4054) Users of Ghostscript are advised to upgrade to these updated packages, which contain backported patches to correct these issues. 4. Solution: Before applying this update, make sure all previously-released errata relevant to your system have been applied. This update is available via the Red Hat Network. Details on how to use the Red Hat Network to apply this update are available at https://access.redhat.com/kb/docs/DOC-11259 5. Bugs fixed (http://bugzilla.redhat.com/): 599564 - CVE-2010-2055 ghostscript: gs_init.ps searched in current directory despite -P- 627902 - CVE-2009-3743 ghostscript: TrueType bytecode intepreter integer overflow or wraparound 646086 - CVE-2010-4054 ghostscript: glyph data access improper input validation 771853 - CVE-2010-4820 ghostscript: CWD included in the default library search path 6. Package List: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop (v. 5 client): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Client/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm RHEL Desktop Workstation (v. 5 client): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Client/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux (v. 5 server): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ia64: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ia64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ia64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ia64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ia64.rpm ppc: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.ppc.rpm s390x: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.s390x.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.i386.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-6.el5_7.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Client/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop Optional (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Client/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6ComputeNode/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node Optional (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6ComputeNode/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ppc64: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc64.rpm s390x: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390x.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server Optional (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ppc64: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.ppc64.rpm s390x: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390x.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.s390x.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Workstation/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation Optional (v. 6): Source: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Workstation/en/os/SRPMS/ghostscript-8.70-11.el6_2.6.src.rpm i386: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm x86_64: ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-debuginfo-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.i686.rpm ghostscript-devel-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-doc-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm ghostscript-gtk-8.70-11.el6_2.6.x86_64.rpm These packages are GPG signed by Red Hat for security. Our key and details on how to verify the signature are available from https://access.redhat.com/security/team/key/#package 7. References: https://www.redhat.com/security/data/cve/CVE-2009-3743.html https://www.redhat.com/security/data/cve/CVE-2010-2055.html https://www.redhat.com/security/data/cve/CVE-2010-4054.html https://www.redhat.com/security/data/cve/CVE-2010-4820.html https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/#moderate 8. Contact: The Red Hat security contact is <secalert@redhat.com>. More contact details at https://access.redhat.com/security/team/contact/ Copyright 2012 Red Hat, Inc. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQFPKxQeXlSAg2UNWIIRArqLAJYndAdU+gEQ5Ki//vi/wh7KgAtYAJ9NwToi Ov6GX/QA+l4EOfr9Yj/1Qg== =6sZd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- RHSA-announce mailing list RHSA-announce@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhsa-announce . ========================================================================== Ubuntu Security Notice USN-1317-1 January 04, 2012 ghostscript vulnerabilities ========================================================================== A security issue affects these releases of Ubuntu and its derivatives: - Ubuntu 10.10 - Ubuntu 10.04 LTS - Ubuntu 8.04 LTS Summary: Ghostscript could be made to crash or run programs as your login if it opened a specially crafted file. Software Description: - ghostscript: The GPL Ghostscript PostScript/PDF interpreter Details: It was discovered that Ghostscript did not correctly handle memory allocation when parsing certain malformed JPEG-2000 images. (CVE-2008-3520) It was discovered that Ghostscript did not correctly handle certain formatting operations when parsing JPEG-2000 images. (CVE-2008-3522) It was discovered that Ghostscript incorrectly handled certain malformed TrueType fonts. This issue only affected Ubuntu 8.04 LTS. (CVE-2009-3743) It was discovered that Ghostscript incorrectly handled certain malformed Type 2 fonts. This issue only affected Ubuntu 8.04 LTS. (CVE-2010-4054) Jonathan Foote discovered that Ghostscript incorrectly handled certain malformed JPEG-2000 image files. (CVE-2011-4516, CVE-2011-4517) Update instructions: The problem can be corrected by updating your system to the following package versions: Ubuntu 10.10: libgs8 8.71.dfsg.2-0ubuntu7.1 Ubuntu 10.04 LTS: libgs8 8.71.dfsg.1-0ubuntu5.4 Ubuntu 8.04 LTS: libgs8 8.61.dfsg.1-1ubuntu3.4 In general, a standard system update will make all the necessary changes. --[ Vulnerability details: memove() is defined in string.h and has the following prototype: void *memmove(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n); It is worth noticing that size_t is a signed integer. In ghostscript-8.70.dfsg.1/base/ttinterp.c we can find the following code snippet: /*******************************************/ /* MINDEX[] : move indexed element */ /* CodeRange : $26 */ static void Ins_MINDEX( INS_ARG ) { Long L, K; [0] L = args[0]; [1] if ( L<0 || L > CUR.args ) [2] { CUR.error = TT_Err_Invalid_Reference; return; } K = CUR.stack[CUR.args - L]; [3] memmove( (&CUR.stack[CUR.args - L ]), [4] (&CUR.stack[CUR.args - L + 1]), (L - 1) * sizeof ( Long ) ); CUR.stack[ CUR.args-1 ] = K; } [0] L is actually an unsigned long on x86. [1] L is user controled. [2] what if L is null then ? [3] will work fine with L null... [4] if L was null, then the sized passed to memmove is casted from an unsigned long to a signed integer (size_t) worthing 111111111111111111111111111111 in binary, or 0x3fffffff. Let's now consider the third argument passed to memmove in [4]. This value is used as a counter in register ecx, resulting in the copy of a very large chunk of memory (0x3fffffff ~= 1Gb). At this time, the destination being somewhere in the heap, the appliation will eventually fill the heap segment with (unexpected) data, and the copy will fail when trying to write to the first non mapped address after the heap in the address space, generating a segmentation fault. Experimentally, reaching this codepath has shown to be possible. The values of the registers (in particular ecx and edi) at crash time are coherent with our expectations and the explaination above : Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. -------------------------------------------------------------------------[ regs eax:FFFFFFFC ebx:405B6FF4 ecx:3FF85061 edx:0807C844 eflags:00010216 esi:0826A000 edi:08269FFC esp:BFFFDD18 ebp:BFFFDD58 eip:408EFA83 cs:0073 ds:007B es:007B fs:0000 gs:0033 ss:007B o d I t s z A P c [007B:BFFFDD18]---------------------------------------------------------[stack] BFFFDD48 : E0 13 F9 FF F4 6F 5B 40 - 44 C8 07 08 00 00 00 00 .....o[@D....... BFFFDD38 : 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 - 01 00 00 00 0D 00 00 00 ................ BFFFDD28 : FC FF FF FF AE 42 0F 40 - 44 C8 07 08 34 CA 07 08 .....B.@D...4... BFFFDD18 : 26 00 00 00 09 69 0F 40 - 84 E1 07 08 88 E1 07 08 &....i.@........ [007B:0826A000]---------------------------------------------------------[ data] <memmove+35>: rep movs DWORD PTR es:[edi],DWORD PTR ds:[esi] Arbitrary code execution would require to corrupt the heap with a bit more than 1Gb of copied data without writting to invalid memory. Having the heap allocate so much data is not belived to be possible in the current situation under x86 GNU/linux. endrazine@blackbox:~/gs/ghostscript-8.70.dfsg.1$ ldd /bin/* /sbin/* \ /usr/sbin/* /usr/local/bin/* \ /usr/local/sbin/* /usr/bin/* 2>/dev/null |grep "libgs.so\|:"|grep "libgs" -B 1 /usr/sbin/lpdomatic: libgs.so.8 => /usr/lib/libgs.so.8 (0xb7785000) -- /usr/bin/directomatic: libgs.so.8 => /usr/lib/libgs.so.8 (0xb7785000) -- /usr/bin/foomatic-rip: libgs.so.8 => /usr/lib/libgs.so.8 (0xb7785000) -- /usr/bin/ghostscript: libgs.so.8 => /usr/lib/libgs.so.8 (0xb7785000) -- /usr/bin/gs: libgs.so.8 => /usr/lib/libgs.so.8 (0xb7785000) endrazine@blackbox:~/gs/ghostscript-8.70.dfsg.1$ Third party applications linking to this library may also be vulnerable. --[ Patch: This off by one can be mitigated by applying the following patch in ghostscript-8.70.dfsg.1/base/ttinterp.c : - if ( L<0 || L > CUR.args ) + if ( L<=0 || L > CUR.args ) The patch that has actually been merged to Ghostscript is strictly equivalent. --[ Disclosure timeline: * 19/10/2009: Contact Vendor. * 19/10/2009: Vendor replies to our mail asking for details. * 26/10/2009: Recontact vendor, ask for a valid pgp key. * 05/11/2009: Recontact vendor who failed at providing a valid pgp key. * 15/11/2009: Receive a valid pgp key from vendor. Provide details, including two PoCs to the Vendor. * 16/12/2009: Recontact the vendor who doesn't get back to us. * 05/01/2010: Vendor asks for more details including a complete bug analysis and patches. * 06/01/2010: Provide full analysis and patches to the vendor. * 06/01/2010: Vendor claims to have silently patched the vulnerability in their development branch. * 01/03/2010: Ping vendor, who remains silent... * 22/03/2010: Ping vendor, who remains silent... * 20/07/2010: Inform the CERT about the vulnearbility. * 20/07/2010: Recontact CERT about this vulnerability. * 03/08/2010: CERT gets back to us asking for details. * 09/08/2010: Send available information to the CERT. * 13/08/2010: The CERT compares our patch and the applied patch in addition to the material we provided and concludes the vendor actually did fix the vulnerability as we suggested, but silently, denying us any kind of credit. * 14/08/2010: The CERT assigns CVE number CVE-2009-3743 to this vulnerability. * 25/11/2010: Public disclosure. Note: The vendor claims to follow a bounty program for coders fixing bugs in their software. From our experience, they do not practice such a thing but silently patch reported bugs instead. We hope this was merely an exception. --[ Credits: This vulnerability was discovered by Jonathan Brossard from Toucan System. --[ About Toucan System:

IOT TAXONOMY

AFFECTED PRODUCTS

CVSS

PROBLEMTYPE DATA

THREAT TYPE

remote

TYPE

digital error

CONFIGURATIONS

PATCH

EXTERNAL IDS

REFERENCES

CREDITS

Jonathan Brossard

SOURCES

LAST UPDATE DATE

2024-11-23T21:25:46.054000+00:00

SOURCES UPDATE DATE

SOURCES RELEASE DATE