GHSA-3QQQ-357H-32GJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:39 – Updated: 2025-11-04 21:30A flaw was found in dnsmasq before 2.83. A buffer overflow vulnerability was discovered in the way dnsmasq extract names from DNS packets before validating them with DNSSEC data. An attacker on the network, who can create valid DNS replies, could use this flaw to cause an overflow with arbitrary data in a heap-allocated memory, possibly executing code on the machine. The flaw is in the rfc1035.c:extract_name() function, which writes data to the memory pointed by name assuming MAXDNAME*2 bytes are available in the buffer. However, in some code execution paths, it is possible extract_name() gets passed an offset from the base buffer, thus reducing, in practice, the number of available bytes that can be written in the buffer. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to data confidentiality and integrity as well as system availability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-25682"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-122",
"CWE-787"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-01-20T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in dnsmasq before 2.83. A buffer overflow vulnerability was discovered in the way dnsmasq extract names from DNS packets before validating them with DNSSEC data. An attacker on the network, who can create valid DNS replies, could use this flaw to cause an overflow with arbitrary data in a heap-allocated memory, possibly executing code on the machine. The flaw is in the rfc1035.c:extract_name() function, which writes data to the memory pointed by name assuming MAXDNAME*2 bytes are available in the buffer. However, in some code execution paths, it is possible extract_name() gets passed an offset from the base buffer, thus reducing, in practice, the number of available bytes that can be written in the buffer. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to data confidentiality and integrity as well as system availability.",
"id": "GHSA-3qqq-357h-32gj",
"modified": "2025-11-04T21:30:25Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:39:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-25682"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1882014"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2021/03/msg00027.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/QGB7HL3OWHTLEPSMLDGOMXQKG3KM2QME"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WYW3IR6APUSKOYKL5FT3ACTIHWHGQY32"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/QGB7HL3OWHTLEPSMLDGOMXQKG3KM2QME"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WYW3IR6APUSKOYKL5FT3ACTIHWHGQY32"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202101-17"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2021/dsa-4844"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jsof-tech.com/disclosures/dnspooq"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/434904"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.