CVE-2018-15160 in libesedb
Summary
by MITRE
** DISPUTED ** The libesedb_catalog_definition_read function in libesedb_catalog_definition.c in libesedb through 2018-04-01 allows remote attackers to cause a heap-based buffer over-read via a crafted esedb file. NOTE: the vendor has disputed this as described in the GitHub issue comments.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 08/05/2024
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2018-15160 affects the libesedb library, a component used for reading extensible storage engine database files commonly found in Windows systems. This library serves as a critical interface for accessing and parsing esedb file formats that store application data, system logs, and other structured information. The issue stems from improper input validation within the libesedb_catalog_definition_read function located in the libesedb_catalog_definition.c source file. The vulnerability manifests when processing specially crafted esedb files that contain malformed data structures designed to trigger memory access violations.
The technical flaw represents a heap-based buffer over-read condition that occurs when the library attempts to parse catalog definition data from maliciously constructed esedb files. This type of vulnerability falls under the CWE-125 weakness category, which specifically addresses out-of-bounds read errors in memory management operations. The function fails to properly validate the size and structure of incoming data before attempting to read from allocated memory buffers, allowing attackers to manipulate memory access patterns and potentially read sensitive data from adjacent memory locations. The heap-based nature of this vulnerability means that the over-read occurs in dynamically allocated memory regions rather than on the stack, making it particularly challenging to detect and exploit consistently.
From an operational perspective, this vulnerability presents significant risks for systems that process untrusted esedb files, particularly in environments where automated parsing or file analysis tools are deployed. Remote attackers could leverage this weakness to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information stored in memory, potentially leading to data leakage or further exploitation. The impact extends beyond simple information disclosure, as the over-read could expose cryptographic keys, authentication tokens, or other confidential data residing in adjacent memory segments. Security professionals should consider this vulnerability in the context of ATT&CK technique T1059, which covers command and control communications, as attackers might use such memory access patterns to extract information from compromised systems.
The vendor has disputed this vulnerability, indicating potential disagreement over the classification or severity assessment of the reported issue. This dispute typically arises when vendors believe the reported conditions do not constitute a valid security vulnerability or when they disagree with the interpretation of how the flaw could be exploited in real-world scenarios. The GitHub issue comments referenced in the original description likely contain technical discussions between researchers and vendors regarding the validity of the exploit conditions and the actual risk posed by the memory access anomaly. Organizations should carefully evaluate the vendor's position while considering their own threat landscape and risk tolerance when determining whether to implement mitigations or workarounds for this potential vulnerability.
While the vulnerability's impact may be limited by the specific conditions required for exploitation, the potential for heap-based buffer over-reads in database parsing libraries remains a significant concern for system security. The libesedb library's widespread use in Windows environments means that any vulnerability affecting its memory handling capabilities could potentially impact numerous applications and services that rely on proper esedb file processing. Security teams should monitor for updates from the vendor and consider implementing defensive measures such as input validation, file access controls, and monitoring for unusual memory access patterns that might indicate exploitation attempts. Additionally, organizations should review their incident response procedures to ensure readiness for potential exploitation of similar memory corruption vulnerabilities that could arise from improper data handling in database parsing components.