btrfsmaintenance up to 0.4.1 evaluate_auto_mountpoint access control
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 8.1 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability was found in btrfsmaintenance up to 0.4.1. It has been rated as critical. This affects the function evaluate_auto_mountpoint of the file /etc/sysconfig/btrfsmaintenance. Performing a manipulation results in access control.
This vulnerability is known as CVE-2018-14722. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability was found in btrfsmaintenance up to 0.4.1. It has been classified as critical. This affects the function evaluate_auto_mountpoint of the file /etc/sysconfig/btrfsmaintenance. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a access control vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-264. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
An issue was discovered in evaluate_auto_mountpoint in btrfsmaintenance-functions in btrfsmaintenance through 0.4.1. Code execution as root can occur via a specially crafted filesystem label if btrfs-{scrub,balance,trim} are set to auto in /etc/sysconfig/btrfsmaintenance (this is not the default, though).
The bug was discovered 08/14/2018. The weakness was published 08/15/2018 (oss-sec). It is possible to read the advisory at openwall.com. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2018-14722 since 07/28/2018. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. No form of authentication is needed for exploitation. Technical details of the vulnerability are known, but there is no available exploit. The attack technique deployed by this issue is T1068 according to MITRE ATT&CK.
The vulnerability was handled as a non-public zero-day exploit for at least 1 days. During that time the estimated underground price was around $0-$5k.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Product
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 8.1VulDB Meta Temp Score: 8.1
VulDB Base Score: 8.1
VulDB Temp Score: 8.1
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 8.1
NVD Vector: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Access controlCWE: CWE-264
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
07/28/2018 🔍08/14/2018 🔍
08/15/2018 🔍
08/15/2018 🔍
08/16/2018 🔍
03/16/2020 🔍
Sources
Advisory: openwall.comStatus: Not defined
Confirmation: 🔍
CVE: CVE-2018-14722 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2018-14722
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-122955
Entry
Created: 08/16/2018 06:34Updated: 03/16/2020 08:34
Changes: 08/16/2018 06:34 (57), 03/16/2020 08:34 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.