In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
staging: rtl8723bs: fix OOB read in rtw_get_wpa_ie()
rtw_get_wpa_ie() reads bytes at fixed offsets into a vendor-specific
information element without checking that the element is long enough,
causing an out-of-bounds read for a short trailing IE.
The function locates a vendor-specific IE (EID 221) with rtw_get_ie()
and then compares a 4-byte OUI+type at pbuf + 2 and reads a 2-byte
version word at pbuf + 6. Those accesses require the IE body to be at
least 6 bytes, but rtw_get_ie() only guarantees that the element fits
within the buffer; it does not enforce a minimum body length. A
vendor-specific IE whose length byte is 0 to 5, placed at the end of
the buffer, therefore makes these reads run past the end of the IE and
past the end of the buffer itself.
The buffer holds information elements taken from received management
frames and from the IE blob passed to rtw_cfg80211_set_wpa_ie(), which
is kmemdup'd to its exact length, so the read can run off the end of
the allocation.
The sibling helpers rtw_get_sec_ie(), rtw_get_wapi_ie() and
rtw_get_wps_ie() in this file already reject too-short vendor-specific
IEs before their OUI memcmp(); rtw_get_wpa_ie() was never brought in
line with them, and needs a minimum of 6 rather than 4 bytes because
of the version word. Add the missing length check.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it