CVE-2010-3192 in C Library
Summary
by MITRE
Certain run-time memory protection mechanisms in the GNU C Library (aka glibc or libc6) print argv[0] and backtrace information, which might allow context-dependent attackers to obtain sensitive information from process memory by executing an incorrect program, as demonstrated by a setuid program that contains a stack-based buffer overflow error, related to the __fortify_fail function in debug/fortify_fail.c, and the __stack_chk_fail (aka stack protection) and __chk_fail (aka FORTIFY_SOURCE) implementations.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 01/05/2018
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2010-3192 represents a significant information disclosure flaw within the GNU C Library that affects systems utilizing glibc version 2.10.1 and earlier. This issue stems from the runtime memory protection mechanisms implemented in glibc, specifically within the debug/fortify_fail.c file where the __fortify_fail function operates. The flaw manifests when programs execute with incorrect parameters or encounter runtime errors, causing the system to print argv[0] and backtrace information that inadvertently exposes sensitive data from process memory. This vulnerability is particularly concerning because it can be exploited through setuid programs that contain stack-based buffer overflow errors, making it a critical concern for system security.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability involves the interaction between multiple glibc protection mechanisms including __stack_chk_fail for stack protection and __chk_fail for FORTIFY_SOURCE implementations. When a program encounters a stack-based buffer overflow or other memory corruption issues, the system's debugging mechanisms activate and output detailed information including the program name and stack trace information. These debugging outputs can contain fragments of process memory that may include sensitive data such as passwords, cryptographic keys, or other confidential information. The vulnerability specifically affects the __fortify_fail function which is designed to detect and report buffer overflows, but in doing so, it inadvertently leaks memory contents to attackers who can manipulate program execution to trigger these debug outputs.
The operational impact of CVE-2010-3192 extends beyond simple information disclosure, as it can be leveraged by context-dependent attackers to gain insights into system memory structures and potentially extract sensitive information from running processes. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability by crafting malicious inputs to setuid programs or other executables that are vulnerable to stack-based buffer overflows. The vulnerability is particularly dangerous in environments where sensitive information is stored in memory and where attackers can influence program execution paths to trigger the problematic code paths. This flaw essentially transforms legitimate debugging functionality into an information leakage mechanism that can be weaponized against systems running vulnerable versions of glibc.
From a cybersecurity perspective, this vulnerability aligns with CWE-200, which addresses "Information Exposure," and can be mapped to ATT&CK technique T1005 for "Data from Local System." The vulnerability demonstrates how seemingly beneficial security features like stack protection and memory debugging can become attack vectors when not properly implemented to prevent information leakage. Organizations should consider this vulnerability as part of a broader threat landscape where attackers may exploit multiple mechanisms to gather intelligence about target systems. The impact is particularly severe in multi-user environments where setuid programs are commonly used and where memory contents may contain sensitive information from other processes or users.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2010-3192 primarily involve upgrading to glibc versions 2.10.2 and later where the vulnerability has been addressed through improved memory handling and debugging output sanitization. System administrators should also implement proper input validation and sanitization for all programs, particularly those with elevated privileges or setuid capabilities. Additionally, monitoring for unusual program execution patterns and debugging output that might indicate exploitation attempts can help detect potential abuse of this vulnerability. The remediation approach should include comprehensive system hardening measures that reduce the attack surface and implement proper privilege separation to limit the impact of any successful exploitation attempts. Organizations should also conduct regular vulnerability assessments to identify and remediate similar issues in other system components that might exhibit similar memory protection flaws.