CVE-2015-1964 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-2015-1954, CVE-2015-1962, CVE-2015-1963, 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-2015-1964 represents a critical stack-based buffer overflow flaw within the server component of IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack version 6.1 prior to 6.1.12. This vulnerability specifically affects the daemon process responsible for managing storage operations and backup services, creating a significant security risk that can be exploited by remote attackers without authentication. The flaw manifests in the server's handling of incoming network requests, where improper input validation allows malicious data to overwrite adjacent memory locations on the stack, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution or complete service disruption.
The technical implementation of this buffer overflow occurs when the server processes certain network packets or commands that exceed the allocated buffer space in memory. This type of vulnerability falls under the Common Weakness Enumeration category CWE-121, which specifically addresses stack-based buffer overflow conditions where insufficient bounds checking allows attackers to write beyond the allocated memory boundaries. The vulnerability is particularly dangerous because it operates at the daemon level, meaning that successful exploitation can result in complete system compromise or denial of service that affects critical backup and storage operations. The affected IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack server daemon serves as a central point for storage management, making this vulnerability particularly attractive to attackers seeking to disrupt business continuity operations.
From an operational impact perspective, this vulnerability creates severe consequences for organizations relying on IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack for their backup and recovery infrastructure. Remote attackers can leverage this flaw to crash the daemon process, resulting in immediate denial of service that prevents legitimate users from accessing backup services or performing storage operations. The vulnerability's classification as a remote attack vector means that adversaries do not require physical access or local network privileges to exploit the flaw, making it particularly dangerous in enterprise environments where storage management systems are often exposed to external networks. Organizations may experience extended downtime for backup operations, potential data loss if backup services become unavailable during critical periods, and significant operational disruption to their data protection workflows.
The exploitation of this vulnerability aligns with techniques described in the MITRE ATT&CK framework under the Tactic of Execution and the Technique of Exploitation of Remote Services, where adversaries target network-facing services to establish persistence or cause service disruption. Security professionals should note that this vulnerability is distinct from several other related flaws in the same product line, indicating that multiple attack surfaces within the IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack server require individual attention and remediation efforts. Organizations should implement immediate mitigation strategies including applying the vendor-provided patch for version 6.1.12 or higher, implementing network segmentation to limit exposure of the vulnerable daemon, and monitoring for suspicious network activity that may indicate exploitation attempts. Additionally, regular security assessments and vulnerability scanning should be conducted to identify similar issues in other components of the storage management infrastructure, as the presence of one vulnerability often indicates potential for additional security flaws within the same product family.