ghsa-v86f-p49m-5cfc
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-17 02:19
Modified
2022-05-17 02:19
Details

The _bfd_xcoff_read_ar_hdr function in bfd/coff-rs6000.c and bfd/coff64-rs6000.c in the Binary File Descriptor (BFD) library (aka libbfd), as distributed in GNU Binutils 2.29 and earlier, allows remote attackers to cause an out of bounds stack read via a crafted COFF image file.

Show details on source website


{
   affected: [],
   aliases: [
      "CVE-2017-12451",
   ],
   database_specific: {
      cwe_ids: [
         "CWE-125",
      ],
      github_reviewed: false,
      github_reviewed_at: null,
      nvd_published_at: "2017-08-04T15:29:00Z",
      severity: "HIGH",
   },
   details: "The _bfd_xcoff_read_ar_hdr function in bfd/coff-rs6000.c and bfd/coff64-rs6000.c in the Binary File Descriptor (BFD) library (aka libbfd), as distributed in GNU Binutils 2.29 and earlier, allows remote attackers to cause an out of bounds stack read via a crafted COFF image file.",
   id: "GHSA-v86f-p49m-5cfc",
   modified: "2022-05-17T02:19:46Z",
   published: "2022-05-17T02:19:46Z",
   references: [
      {
         type: "ADVISORY",
         url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-12451",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21786",
      },
   ],
   schema_version: "1.4.0",
   severity: [
      {
         score: "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
         type: "CVSS_V3",
      },
   ],
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.

Security Advisory comment format.

This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.

UUIDv4 of the comment
UUIDv4 of the Vulnerability-Lookup instance
When the comment was created originally
When the comment was last updated
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
The identifier of the vulnerability (CVE ID, GHSA-ID, PYSEC ID, etc.).



Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.