ArchLinux: 201911-11: linux-lts: arbitrary code execution

    Date14 Nov 2019
    CategoryArchLinux
    134
    Posted ByLinuxSecurity Advisories
    The package linux-lts before version 4.19.82-1 is vulnerable to arbitrary code execution.
    Arch Linux Security Advisory ASA-201911-11
    ==========================================
    
    Severity: Critical
    Date    : 2019-11-13
    CVE-ID  : CVE-2019-17666
    Package : linux-lts
    Type    : arbitrary code execution
    Remote  : Yes
    Link    : https://security.archlinux.org/AVG-1065
    
    Summary
    =======
    
    The package linux-lts before version 4.19.82-1 is vulnerable to
    arbitrary code execution.
    
    Resolution
    ==========
    
    Upgrade to 4.19.82-1.
    
    # pacman -Syu "linux-lts>=4.19.82-1"
    
    The problem has been fixed upstream in version 4.19.82.
    
    Workaround
    ==========
    
    When Wi-Fi usage is not required, disabling it mitigates the issue.
    
    Description
    ===========
    
    rtl_p2p_noa_ie in drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/ps.c in the
    Linux kernel before 5.3.9, 4.19.82, 4.14.152, 4.9.199, 4.4.199 lacks a
    certain upper-bound check, leading to a buffer overflow. An attacker is
    able to trigger the overflow remotely through Wi-Fi by using a power-
    saving feature known as a Notice of Absence when the Realtek (RTLWIFI)
    driver is being used on the affected host leading to arbitrary code
    execution.
    
    Impact
    ======
    
    A remote attacker in Wi-Fi range is able to execute arbitrary code when
    the Realtek (RTLWIFI) driver is being used on the affected host.
    
    References
    ==========
    
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/16/1226
    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8c55dedb795be8ec0cf488f98c03a1c2176f7fb1
    https://security.archlinux.org/CVE-2019-17666
    
    
    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).
    /main-polls/24-what-do-you-think-of-the-quality-of-the-articles-on-linuxsecurity?task=poll.vote&format=json
    24
    radio
    [{"id":"87","title":"Excellent, don't change a thing!","votes":"66","type":"x","order":"1","pct":57.39,"resources":[]},{"id":"88","title":"Should be more technical","votes":"15","type":"x","order":"2","pct":13.04,"resources":[]},{"id":"89","title":"Should include more HOWTOs","votes":"34","type":"x","order":"3","pct":29.57,"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
    bottom200

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