CVE-2004-0694 in LHA
Summary
by MITRE
Buffer overflow in LHA 1.14 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors related to "command line processing," a different vulnerability than CVE-2004-0771. NOTE: this issue may be REJECTED if there are not any cases in which LHA is setuid or is otherwise used across security boundaries.
Once again VulDB remains the best source for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 06/02/2019
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2004-0694 represents a critical buffer overflow condition within LHA version 1.14 and earlier implementations that specifically affects command line processing functionality. This flaw exists within the decompression utility's handling of user-supplied input parameters, creating a potential pathway for malicious exploitation. The vulnerability is particularly concerning because it can be triggered through remote attack vectors, making it accessible to threat actors without requiring local system access. The buffer overflow occurs during the parsing of command line arguments, where insufficient bounds checking allows attackers to overwrite adjacent memory locations. This type of vulnerability falls under CWE-121, which specifically addresses stack-based buffer overflow conditions that can lead to arbitrary code execution or system instability. The attack surface is expanded when LHA is executed with elevated privileges, such as being setuid root or operating in a networked environment where it processes untrusted input from remote sources. Security researchers have noted that this vulnerability differs from CVE-2004-0771, indicating that multiple distinct buffer overflow conditions exist within the LHA software ecosystem, each potentially exploitable through different attack vectors.
The operational impact of CVE-2004-0694 extends beyond simple denial of service conditions to potentially enable complete system compromise when the vulnerable LHA utility is deployed in security-sensitive contexts. When exploited successfully, the buffer overflow can cause the application to crash and terminate unexpectedly, resulting in denial of service for legitimate users who depend on the decompression functionality. However, the more serious implications arise when the vulnerable system has LHA configured with setuid permissions or operates in environments where it processes untrusted input from external sources. In such scenarios, attackers can leverage the buffer overflow to inject and execute malicious code within the target system's memory space, potentially gaining elevated privileges or establishing persistent access. The vulnerability's exploitation aligns with techniques described in the attack pattern taxonomy under ATT&CK framework's T1059.007 for command and scripting interpreter, where attackers can manipulate command line parameters to achieve unauthorized code execution. The memory corruption that occurs during command line processing creates opportunities for attackers to overwrite return addresses, function pointers, or other critical control data structures within the program's execution context.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2004-0694 should focus on both immediate remediation and long-term architectural improvements to prevent similar vulnerabilities from emerging in future software deployments. The most effective immediate solution involves upgrading to LHA versions that have addressed this buffer overflow condition, as newer releases contain proper bounds checking mechanisms and memory management controls. System administrators should conduct comprehensive inventory assessments to identify all instances of vulnerable LHA versions within their environments, particularly those operating with setuid permissions or processing network-based input. When immediate upgrades are not feasible, implementing restrictive file access controls and input validation measures can help reduce the attack surface. Security configurations should ensure that LHA is not installed with setuid privileges unless absolutely necessary, as this practice significantly increases the potential impact of exploitation. Network segmentation and firewall rules should be implemented to prevent unauthorized access to systems running vulnerable LHA versions, particularly in environments where the utility might process untrusted input from external sources. Additionally, regular security audits and code reviews should incorporate specific checks for buffer overflow conditions in command line processing functions, following established security development lifecycle practices. The vulnerability serves as a reminder of the importance of input validation and memory safety practices in software development, particularly for utilities that handle user-supplied parameters in security-critical applications. Organizations should also consider implementing runtime protections such as stack canaries, address space layout randomization, and data execution prevention mechanisms to provide additional layers of defense against exploitation attempts.