Recherche « Siemens simatic pcs 7 »

Linux · Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 · Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10.0 Extended Update Support · Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Extended Lifecycle Support

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipc: limit next_id allocation to the valid ID range The checkpoint/restore sysctl path can request the next SysV IPC id through ids->next_id. ipc_idr_alloc() currently forwards that request to idr_alloc() with an open-ended upper bound. If the valid tail of the SysV IPC id space is full, the allocation can spill beyond ipc_mni. The returned SysV IPC id still uses the normal index encoding, so later lookup and removal can target the wrong slot. This leaves the real IDR entry behind and breaks the IDR state for the object. The bug is in ipc_idr_alloc() in the checkpoint/restore path. 1. ids->next_id is passed to: idr_alloc(&ids->ipcs_idr, new, ipcid_to_idx(next_id), 0, ...) 2. The zero upper bound makes the allocation effectively open-ended. Once the valid SysV IPC tail is occupied, idr_alloc() can spill past ipc_mni and allocate an entry beyond the valid IPC id range. 3. The new object id is still encoded with the narrower SysV IPC index width: new->id = (new->seq << ipcmni_seq_shift()) + idx 4. Later removal goes through ipc_rmid(), which uses: ipcid_to_idx(ipcp->id) That truncates the real IDR index. An object actually stored at a high index can then be removed as if it lived at a low in-range index. 5. For shared memory, shm_destroy() frees the current object anyway, but the real high IDR slot is left behind as a dangling pointer. 6. A subsequent walk of /proc/sysvipc/shm reaches the stale IDR entry and dereferences freed memory. Prevent this by bounding the requested allocation to ipc_mni so the checkpoint/restore path fails once the valid range is exhausted.

Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V4.1 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V5.0 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V6.0 · Siemens User Management Component (UMC)

A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC PCS neo V4.1 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS neo V5.0 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS neo V6.0 (All versions < V6.0 SP1 Update 1), User Management Component (UMC) (All versions < V2.15.1.3). Affected products contain a out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the integrated UMC component. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause a denial of service condition.

Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V4.1 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V5.0 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V6.0 · Siemens User Management Component (UMC)

A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC PCS neo V4.1 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS neo V5.0 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS neo V6.0 (All versions < V6.0 SP1 Update 1), User Management Component (UMC) (All versions < V2.15.1.3). Affected products contain a out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the integrated UMC component. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause a denial of service condition.

Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V4.1 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V5.0 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS neo V6.0 · Siemens User Management Component (UMC)

A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC PCS neo V4.1 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS neo V5.0 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS neo V6.0 (All versions < V6.0 SP1 Update 1), User Management Component (UMC) (All versions < V2.15.1.3). Affected products contain a out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the integrated UMC component. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause a denial of service condition.

Siemens SIMATIC NET PC Software V14 · Siemens SIMATIC NET PC Software V15 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS 7 V8.2 · Siemens SIMATIC PCS 7 V9.0

A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC NET PC Software V14 (All versions), SIMATIC NET PC Software V15 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS 7 V8.2 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS 7 V9.0 (All versions), SIMATIC PCS 7 V9.1 (All versions), SIMATIC WinCC (All versions < V8.0), SINAUT Software ST7sc (All versions). Before SIMATIC WinCC V8, legacy OPC services (OPC DA (Data Access), OPC HDA (Historical Data Access), and OPC AE (Alarms & Events)) were used per default. These services were designed on top of the Windows ActiveX and DCOM mechanisms and do not implement state-of-the-art security mechanisms for authentication and encryption of contents.