CVE-2023-29318 in InDesign
Summary
by MITRE • 07/12/2023
Adobe InDesign versions ID18.3 (and earlier) and ID17.4.1 (and earlier) are affected by an out-of-bounds read vulnerability that could lead to disclosure of sensitive memory. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass mitigations such as ASLR. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 07/12/2023
Adobe InDesign software suffers from a critical out-of-bounds read vulnerability that affects versions ID18.3 and earlier, as well as ID17.4.1 and earlier releases. This vulnerability represents a fundamental flaw in how the application processes certain file structures, specifically within its memory management routines. The issue manifests when the software attempts to read data from memory locations that are outside the bounds of allocated buffers, creating a potential pathway for unauthorized information disclosure. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-125, which describes out-of-bounds read conditions that can result in information exposure and system compromise. Attackers can exploit this weakness by crafting malicious files that, when opened by an unsuspecting user, trigger the problematic code path within the application's processing pipeline.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple information disclosure, as it can effectively bypass critical security mitigations such as Address Space Layout Randomization. ASLR is a fundamental defense mechanism designed to randomize memory layout to prevent exploitation of memory corruption vulnerabilities, but this out-of-bounds read flaw undermines these protections by allowing attackers to gather memory layout information through controlled data access patterns. The exploitation requires user interaction, meaning victims must actively open the malicious file, which makes this a targeted attack vector that relies on social engineering or supply chain compromise. This user interaction requirement limits the automated exploitation potential but does not eliminate the serious security implications for organizations that may be targeted through spear-phishing campaigns or compromised software distribution channels.
Security researchers have identified that the vulnerability stems from insufficient bounds checking within InDesign's file parsing logic, particularly when processing specific document elements or metadata structures. The flaw allows attackers to read adjacent memory locations, potentially exposing sensitive information such as stack canaries, heap metadata, or other security-relevant data that could be used to construct more sophisticated attacks. This type of vulnerability aligns with ATT&CK technique T1059.007, which covers the use of application-specific exploits to gain unauthorized access to systems. Organizations using affected versions of Adobe InDesign should consider implementing network segmentation and access controls to limit potential attack surfaces, while also monitoring for suspicious file opening activities that could indicate exploitation attempts. The vulnerability represents a significant risk to creative professionals and publishing organizations that rely heavily on InDesign for their workflow, as these users may encounter compromised files through legitimate business processes or third-party content delivery channels.
Mitigation strategies should include immediate deployment of Adobe's security patches for the affected versions, while also implementing defensive measures such as application whitelisting, file extension filtering, and user education about the risks of opening untrusted documents. Organizations should conduct vulnerability assessments to identify systems running the affected software versions and prioritize remediation efforts accordingly. The security community has emphasized that this vulnerability demonstrates the importance of proper input validation and bounds checking in software development, particularly for applications that process complex file formats with extensive metadata structures. Given the nature of the flaw, organizations should also consider implementing endpoint detection and response solutions that can monitor for anomalous file processing behaviors that might indicate exploitation attempts.