CVE-2015-1954 in Tivoli Storage Manager Fastback
Summary
by MITRE
Stack-based buffer overflow in the server in IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack 6.1 before 6.1.12 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-1924, CVE-2015-1925, CVE-2015-1929, CVE-2015-1930, CVE-2015-1948, CVE-2015-1953, CVE-2015-1962, CVE-2015-1963, CVE-2015-1964, and CVE-2015-1965.
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 05/22/2022
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2015-1954 represents a stack-based buffer overflow affecting IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack 6.1 before version 6.1.12. This critical flaw resides within the server component of the storage management software, specifically targeting the daemon process that handles remote communication and storage operations. The vulnerability manifests when the system processes certain input data structures without proper bounds checking, creating an exploitable condition that can be leveraged by remote attackers to disrupt service availability. The flaw is particularly concerning as it operates at the core level of the storage management infrastructure, potentially compromising the integrity of backup and recovery operations that organizations depend upon for business continuity.
The technical implementation of this buffer overflow occurs through improper input validation mechanisms within the server daemon's processing routines. When remote clients establish connections or transmit specific data payloads to the FastBack server, the system fails to adequately verify the size and content of incoming buffers before copying data into fixed-size stack allocations. This classic programming error allows attackers to overwrite adjacent memory locations, potentially corrupting the program's execution flow and causing the daemon to terminate unexpectedly. The vulnerability's classification as stack-based indicates that the overflow specifically targets the program's stack memory region, which contains function return addresses, local variables, and control information essential for proper program execution. According to CWE standards, this maps directly to CWE-121, which describes stack-based buffer overflow conditions where insufficient bounds checking leads to memory corruption.
The operational impact of CVE-2015-1954 extends beyond simple denial of service, as it fundamentally undermines the reliability and availability of critical storage management services. Remote attackers can exploit this vulnerability to cause daemon crashes, resulting in immediate disruption of backup operations and storage management functions. Organizations utilizing IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack may experience cascading effects including failed backup jobs, interrupted data protection workflows, and potential data loss scenarios during recovery operations. The vulnerability's remote exploitability means that attackers do not require physical access or local privileges, making it particularly dangerous in networked environments where the FastBack server is exposed to external networks. From an attack framework perspective, this vulnerability aligns with ATT&CK technique T1499.004, which covers network denial of service attacks targeting critical infrastructure components.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2015-1954 should prioritize immediate patch deployment to IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack 6.1.12 or later versions where the buffer overflow has been addressed through proper bounds checking implementations. Network segmentation and firewall rules should be implemented to restrict access to FastBack server ports to trusted administrative networks only, reducing the attack surface available to potential remote exploitation. Additionally, organizations should implement monitoring solutions to detect unusual daemon restart patterns or service interruptions that may indicate exploitation attempts. System hardening measures including disabling unnecessary network services, implementing secure configuration baselines, and regular vulnerability assessments will further reduce risk exposure. The remediation process should include comprehensive testing of patched environments to ensure that the vulnerability has been properly resolved without introducing regressions in functionality, particularly around backup and restore operations that are critical to the system's core purpose.