GHSA-fp55-jw48-c537
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Impact
Versions of astral-tokio-tar prior to 0.6.1 contain a PAX header interpretation bug that allows manipulated entries to be made selectively visible or invisible during extraction with astral-tokio-tar versus other tar implementations. An attacker could use this differential to smuggle unexpected files onto a victim's filesystem.
See GHSA-j5gw-2vrg-8fgx for a similar desynchronization bug in astral-tokio-tar.
Patches
Versions 0.6.1 and newer of astral-tokio-tar address this differential.
Workarounds
Users are advised to upgrade to version 0.6.1 or newer to address this advisory.
There is no workaround other than upgrading. Users should experience no breaking changes as a result of the upgrade.
Resources
- GHSA-j5gw-2vrg-8fgx is a similar PAX desynchronization bug
Attribution
- Reporter: Adam Harvey (@lawngnome)
GitHub
CVSS SCORE
6.6medium| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| astral-tokio-tar | cargo | - | - | <=0.6.0 | 0.6.1 |
CVSS:4 Severity and metrics
The CVSS metrics represent different qualitative aspects of a vulnerability that impact the overall score, as defined by the CVSS Specification.
The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone). One example of an Adjacent attack would be an ARP (IPv4) or neighbor discovery (IPv6) flood leading to a denial of service on the local LAN segment (e.g., CVE-2013-6014).
Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.
The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
The attacker is unauthenticated prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker. Examples include: a remote attacker is able to send packets to a target system a locally authenticated attacker executes code to elevate privileges.
There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the Vulnerable System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
RustSec
-
Chainguard
CGA-8qgm-prvx-jwwr
-
minimos
MINI-gqjq-54cq-p5v6
-