CVE-2022-41580 in HarmonyOS
Summary
by MITRE • 10/14/2022
The HW_KEYMASTER module has a vulnerability of not verifying the data read.Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may cause malicious construction of data, which results in out-of-bounds access.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 05/15/2025
The HW_KEYMASTER module represents a critical security component within hardware-based key management systems that handle cryptographic operations and secure key storage. This vulnerability resides in the data verification mechanisms that are supposed to validate all input data before processing. The flaw manifests as insufficient validation checks during data reading operations, creating a pathway for adversarial actors to construct malformed or malicious data payloads. The vulnerability is classified as a failure in input sanitization and validation controls that should be fundamental to any secure cryptographic module implementation. This weakness directly impacts the integrity of the key management system and compromises the trust model that hardware security modules are designed to maintain.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability stems from inadequate boundary checking and data validation routines within the hardware keymaster's data processing pipeline. When the module reads data from storage or communication interfaces, it fails to perform proper verification of data integrity and bounds. This allows attackers to craft data structures that exceed expected boundaries or contain unexpected values, leading to potential memory corruption scenarios. The vulnerability aligns with CWE-129 which addresses insufficient validation of length of input data, and CWE-125 which covers out-of-bounds read conditions. The flaw essentially removes the protective barriers that should prevent data from exceeding allocated memory regions or containing invalid structures that could cause unpredictable behavior. From an operational perspective, this vulnerability represents a significant risk to cryptographic security because it could enable attackers to manipulate key storage or processing operations in ways that compromise the entire security infrastructure.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple data corruption scenarios to potentially enable complete compromise of the hardware security module's cryptographic functions. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to construct data that triggers out-of-bounds memory access patterns, potentially leading to information disclosure, privilege escalation, or denial of service conditions. The vulnerability creates opportunities for attackers to manipulate key material or cryptographic operations through carefully crafted data inputs that bypass normal validation procedures. This weakness directly violates security principles established in the NIST SP 800-147 standard for hardware security modules, which requires robust input validation and data integrity checks. The attack surface is particularly concerning because it affects the core data handling mechanisms of the key management system, potentially allowing adversaries to gain unauthorized access to cryptographic keys or manipulate the secure processing environment.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability should focus on implementing comprehensive input validation and boundary checking mechanisms throughout the data reading and processing pipeline. The recommended approach includes adding strict length validation, implementing proper bounds checking for all data access operations, and establishing robust error handling routines that can detect and reject malformed data inputs. Security controls should be aligned with the ATT&CK framework's T1552.001 technique for credentials from password storage packages and T1078.004 for valid accounts, as this vulnerability could potentially enable attackers to extract or manipulate stored cryptographic credentials. Hardware vendors should implement comprehensive testing procedures including fuzzing and boundary condition testing to identify similar validation gaps. Additionally, the system should incorporate monitoring capabilities to detect anomalous data access patterns that might indicate exploitation attempts, while maintaining audit trails for security incident response and forensic analysis purposes.