CVE-2014-0834 in General Parallel File System
Summary
by MITRE
IBM General Parallel File System (GPFS) 3.4 through 3.4.0.27 and 3.5 through 3.5.0.16 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via crafted arguments to a setuid program.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 02/01/2022
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2014-0834 affects IBM General Parallel File System versions 3.4 through 3.4.0.27 and 3.5 through 3.5.0.16, representing a critical security flaw that enables remote attackers to execute denial of service attacks against GPFS daemon processes. This issue stems from insufficient input validation within a setuid program component of the file system, creating a pathway for malicious actors to manipulate system resources through carefully crafted arguments that trigger daemon crashes. The vulnerability specifically targets the privilege escalation mechanisms inherent in setuid programs, which are designed to provide elevated permissions while maintaining system security boundaries.
The technical flaw manifests when a maliciously constructed argument is passed to a setuid program within the GPFS implementation, causing the daemon process to terminate unexpectedly and resulting in system-wide service disruption. This vulnerability operates at the intersection of privilege management and input sanitization, where the setuid program fails to properly validate user-supplied parameters before processing them. The flaw essentially allows unprivileged users to exploit the elevated privileges of the setuid binary to cause system instability, as the program does not adequately filter or sanitize input parameters that could lead to buffer overflows or other memory corruption conditions. Such issues typically fall under CWE-121, which addresses stack-based buffer overflow conditions, or CWE-122, which covers heap-based buffer overflow scenarios, though the exact mechanism may vary based on implementation details.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple service disruption, as the daemon crashes can potentially lead to data accessibility issues within the parallel file system environment. When GPFS daemons crash, they may leave file system resources in inconsistent states, potentially causing data loss or corruption in active workloads. The vulnerability affects enterprise environments that rely heavily on parallel file systems for high-performance computing applications, where sustained availability is critical for business operations. Organizations utilizing GPFS in mission-critical applications face significant risk of operational downtime, particularly in environments where automated failover mechanisms may not adequately address the daemon failure conditions. The attack vector does not require authentication or specialized privileges beyond normal user access, making it particularly dangerous in multi-user environments where system integrity is paramount.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability should include immediate patch application from IBM, which would address the input validation issues within the setuid programs and prevent the exploitation of daemon crash conditions. System administrators should also implement monitoring solutions to detect unusual daemon crash patterns that may indicate exploitation attempts, while considering temporary restrictions on user access to GPFS command-line tools until patches are applied. Network segmentation and access controls should be reviewed to limit potential attack surfaces, particularly in environments where non-privileged users have access to GPFS administrative functions. The remediation process should also include comprehensive testing of patched environments to ensure that the vulnerability is fully resolved without introducing regressions in system functionality. According to ATT&CK framework, this vulnerability maps to T1499.004, which covers network denial of service, and T1068, which addresses local privilege escalation techniques, making it a significant concern for both network and system security postures. Organizations should also consider implementing additional logging and alerting mechanisms to detect potential exploitation attempts and maintain audit trails for security incident response activities.