ArchLinux: 201409-5: libvirt: out-of-bounds read access

    Date29 Sep 2014
    Posted ByLinuxSecurity Advisories
    The package libvirt before version 1.2.8-2 is vulnerable to an out-of-bounds read access in qemuDomainGetBlockIoTune()..
    Arch Linux Security Advisory ASA-201409-5
    Severity: Medium
    Date    : 2014-09-29
    CVE-ID  : CVE-3633
    Package : libvirt
    Type    : out-of-bounds read access
    Remote  : Yes
    Link    :
    The package libvirt before version 1.2.8-2 is
    vulnerable to an out-of-bounds read access in qemuDomainGetBlockIoTune()..
    Upgrade to 1.2.8-2.
    # pacman -Syu "libvirt>=1.2.8-2"
    The problem has been fixed upstream [0] but no release is available yet.
    The out-of-bounds access is only possible on domains that have had disks
    hot-plugged or removed from the live image without also updating the
    persistent definition to match; keeping the two definitions matched or
    using only transient domains will avoid the problem. Denying access to
    the readonly libvirt socket will avoid the potential for a denial of
    service attack, but will not prevent the out-of-bounds access from
    causing a crash for a privileged client, although such a crash is no
    longer a security problem.
    Luyao Huang of Red Hat found that the qemu implementation of
    virDomainGetBlockIoTune computed an index into the array of disks
    for the live definition, then used it as the index into the array of
    disks for the persistent definition, which could result into an
    out-of-bounds read access in qemuDomainGetBlockIoTune().
    A remote attacker able to establish a read-only connection to
    libvirtd could use this flaw to crash libvirtd or, potentially,
    leak memory from the libvirtd process.
    You are not authorised to post comments.

    Comments powered by CComment

    LinuxSecurity Poll

    What do you think of the articles on LinuxSecurity?

    No answer selected. Please try again.
    Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
    Please select minimum 0 answer(s) and maximum 3 answer(s).
    [{"id":"87","title":"Excellent, don't change a thing!","votes":"5","type":"x","order":"1","pct":55.56,"resources":[]},{"id":"88","title":"Should be more technical","votes":"3","type":"x","order":"2","pct":33.33,"resources":[]},{"id":"89","title":"Should include more HOWTOs","votes":"1","type":"x","order":"3","pct":11.11,"resources":[]}]["#ff5b00","#4ac0f2","#b80028","#eef66c","#60bb22","#b96a9a","#62c2cc"]["rgba(255,91,0,0.7)","rgba(74,192,242,0.7)","rgba(184,0,40,0.7)","rgba(238,246,108,0.7)","rgba(96,187,34,0.7)","rgba(185,106,154,0.7)","rgba(98,194,204,0.7)"]350

    We use cookies to provide and improve our services. By using our site, you consent to our Cookie Policy.