GSD-2022-3924
Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:19Details
This issue can affect BIND 9 resolvers with `stale-answer-enable yes;` that also make use of the option `stale-answer-client-timeout`, configured with a value greater than zero. If the resolver receives many queries that require recursion, there will be a corresponding increase in the number of clients that are waiting for recursion to complete. If there are sufficient clients already waiting when a new client query is received so that it is necessary to SERVFAIL the longest waiting client (see BIND 9 ARM `recursive-clients` limit and soft quota), then it is possible for a race to occur between providing a stale answer to this older client and sending an early timeout SERVFAIL, which may cause an assertion failure. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.12 through 9.16.36, 9.18.0 through 9.18.10, 9.19.0 through 9.19.8, and 9.16.12-S1 through 9.16.36-S1.
Aliases
Aliases
{
"GSD": {
"alias": "CVE-2022-3924",
"id": "GSD-2022-3924",
"references": [
"https://www.debian.org/security/2023/dsa-5329",
"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2022-3924.html",
"https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2022-3924"
]
},
"gsd": {
"metadata": {
"exploitCode": "unknown",
"remediation": "unknown",
"reportConfidence": "confirmed",
"type": "vulnerability"
},
"osvSchema": {
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-3924"
],
"details": "This issue can affect BIND 9 resolvers with `stale-answer-enable yes;` that also make use of the option `stale-answer-client-timeout`, configured with a value greater than zero. If the resolver receives many queries that require recursion, there will be a corresponding increase in the number of clients that are waiting for recursion to complete. If there are sufficient clients already waiting when a new client query is received so that it is necessary to SERVFAIL the longest waiting client (see BIND 9 ARM `recursive-clients` limit and soft quota), then it is possible for a race to occur between providing a stale answer to this older client and sending an early timeout SERVFAIL, which may cause an assertion failure. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.12 through 9.16.36, 9.18.0 through 9.18.10, 9.19.0 through 9.19.8, and 9.16.12-S1 through 9.16.36-S1.",
"id": "GSD-2022-3924",
"modified": "2023-12-13T01:19:39.922272Z",
"schema_version": "1.4.0"
}
},
"namespaces": {
"cve.org": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "security-officer@isc.org",
"ID": "CVE-2022-3924",
"STATE": "PUBLIC"
},
"affects": {
"vendor": {
"vendor_data": [
{
"product": {
"product_data": [
{
"product_name": "BIND 9",
"version": {
"version_data": [
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "9.16.12"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "9.18.0"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "9.19.0"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "9.16.12-S1"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"vendor_name": "ISC"
}
]
}
},
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "ISC would like to thank Maksym Odinintsev from AWS for bringing this vulnerability to our attention."
}
],
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "This issue can affect BIND 9 resolvers with `stale-answer-enable yes;` that also make use of the option `stale-answer-client-timeout`, configured with a value greater than zero. If the resolver receives many queries that require recursion, there will be a corresponding increase in the number of clients that are waiting for recursion to complete. If there are sufficient clients already waiting when a new client query is received so that it is necessary to SERVFAIL the longest waiting client (see BIND 9 ARM `recursive-clients` limit and soft quota), then it is possible for a race to occur between providing a stale answer to this older client and sending an early timeout SERVFAIL, which may cause an assertion failure. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.12 through 9.16.36, 9.18.0 through 9.18.10, 9.19.0 through 9.19.8, and 9.16.12-S1 through 9.16.36-S1."
}
]
},
"exploit": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "We are not aware of any active exploits."
}
],
"impact": {
"cvss": [
{
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "n/a"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://kb.isc.org/docs/cve-2022-3924",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://kb.isc.org/docs/cve-2022-3924"
}
]
},
"solution": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Upgrade to the patched release most closely related to your current version of BIND 9: 9.16.37, 9.18.11, 9.19.9, or 9.16.37-S1."
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "EXTERNAL"
},
"work_around": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Disabling `stale-answer-client-timeout` entirely or setting the timeout value to zero prevents the problem.\n\nIt is not possible to disable the limit on `recursive-clients`, though it could be set to a very high value in order to reduce the likelihood of encountering this scenario. However, this is not recommended as the limit on recursive clients is important for preventing exhaustion of server resources."
}
]
},
"nvd.nist.gov": {
"configurations": {
"CVE_data_version": "4.0",
"nodes": [
{
"children": [],
"cpe_match": [
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.16.13:s1:*:*:supported_preview:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.16.21:s1:*:*:supported_preview:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.16.32:s1:*:*:supported_preview:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.16.14:s1:*:*:supported_preview:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:*:*:*:*:-:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"versionEndExcluding": "9.19.9",
"versionStartIncluding": "9.19.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:*:*:*:*:-:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"versionEndExcluding": "9.18.11",
"versionStartIncluding": "9.18.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.16.36:s1:*:*:supported_preview:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:*:*:*:*:-:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"versionEndExcluding": "9.16.37",
"versionStartIncluding": "9.16.12",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:isc:bind:9.16.12:s1:*:*:supported_preview:*:*:*",
"cpe_name": [],
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
]
},
"cve": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "security-officer@isc.org",
"ID": "CVE-2022-3924"
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "This issue can affect BIND 9 resolvers with `stale-answer-enable yes;` that also make use of the option `stale-answer-client-timeout`, configured with a value greater than zero. If the resolver receives many queries that require recursion, there will be a corresponding increase in the number of clients that are waiting for recursion to complete. If there are sufficient clients already waiting when a new client query is received so that it is necessary to SERVFAIL the longest waiting client (see BIND 9 ARM `recursive-clients` limit and soft quota), then it is possible for a race to occur between providing a stale answer to this older client and sending an early timeout SERVFAIL, which may cause an assertion failure. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.16.12 through 9.16.36, 9.18.0 through 9.18.10, 9.19.0 through 9.19.8, and 9.16.12-S1 through 9.16.36-S1."
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-617"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://kb.isc.org/docs/cve-2022-3924",
"refsource": "MISC",
"tags": [
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://kb.isc.org/docs/cve-2022-3924"
}
]
}
},
"impact": {
"baseMetricV3": {
"cvssV3": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 3.6
}
},
"lastModifiedDate": "2023-02-06T16:28Z",
"publishedDate": "2023-01-26T21:16Z"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
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.
Loading…
Loading…