Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

GHSA-98j8-c9q4-r38g BIT-tensorflow-2022-21733 CVE-2022-21733 PYSEC-2022-112 PYSEC-2022-57 PYSEC-2026-3145

Memory exhaustion in Tensorflow

Medium PyPI
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.83%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 57.52% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-190 Integer Overflow or Wraparound
CWE-400 Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
Fix
Available
3 packages have a fixed version

Description

Impact

The implementation of StringNGrams can be used to trigger a denial of service attack by causing an OOM condition after an integer overflow:

import tensorflow as tf

tf.raw_ops.StringNGrams(
  data=['123456'],
  data_splits=[0,1],
  separator='a'*15,
  ngram_widths=[],
  left_pad='',
  right_pad='',
  pad_width=-5, 
  preserve_short_sequences=True)

We are missing a validation on pad_witdh and that result in computing a negative value for ngram_width which is later used to allocate parts of the output.

Patches

We have patched the issue in GitHub commit f68fdab93fb7f4ddb4eb438c8fe052753c9413e8.

The fix will be included in TensorFlow 2.8.0. We will also cherrypick this commit on TensorFlow 2.7.1, TensorFlow 2.6.3, and TensorFlow 2.5.3, as these are also affected and still in supported range.

For more information

Please consult our security guide for more information regarding the security model and how to contact us with issues and questions.

Attribution

This vulnerability has been reported by Yu Tian of Qihoo 360 AIVul Team.

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
tensorflow
< 2.5.3
2.5.3
tensorflow
>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.3
2.6.3
tensorflow
>= 2.7.0, < 2.7.1
2.7.1
tensorflow
< 2.5.3
>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.3
>= 2.7.0, < 2.7.1
2.5.3
2.6.3
2.7.1
tensorflow-cpu
< 2.5.3
2.5.3
tensorflow-cpu
>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.3
2.6.3
tensorflow-cpu
>= 2.7.0, < 2.7.1
2.7.1
tensorflow-cpu
< 2.5.3
>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.3
2.5.3
2.6.3
tensorflow-gpu
< 2.5.3
2.5.3
tensorflow-gpu
>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.3
2.6.3
tensorflow-gpu
>= 2.7.0, < 2.7.1
2.7.1
tensorflow-gpu
< 2.5.3
>= 2.6.0, < 2.6.3
2.5.3
2.6.3

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

tensorflow PyPI → 2.5.3

pip
pip install --upgrade "tensorflow>=2.5.3"
poetry
poetry add "tensorflow>=2.5.3"
uv
uv add "tensorflow>=2.5.3"

tensorflow-cpu PyPI → 2.5.3

pip
pip install --upgrade "tensorflow-cpu>=2.5.3"
poetry
poetry add "tensorflow-cpu>=2.5.3"
uv
uv add "tensorflow-cpu>=2.5.3"

tensorflow-gpu PyPI → 2.5.3

pip
pip install --upgrade "tensorflow-gpu>=2.5.3"
poetry
poetry add "tensorflow-gpu>=2.5.3"
uv
uv add "tensorflow-gpu>=2.5.3"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
None
Availability (vulnerable system)
Low
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 4.3

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
Low

Weakness

CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

How to prevent it
  • Requirements: Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
  • Requirements: Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++). [REF-106]
  • Implementation: Perform input validation on any numeric input by ensuring that it is within the expected range. Enforce that the input meets both the minimum and maximum requirements for the expected range. Use unsigned integers where possible. This makes it easier to perform validation for integer overflows. When signed integers are required, ensure that the range check includes minimum values as well as maximum values.
  • Implementation: Understand the programming language's underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation (CWE-681). Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, "not-a-number" calculations, and how the language handles numbers that are too large or too small for its underlying representation. [REF-7] Also be careful to account for 32-bit, 64-bit, and other potential differences that may affect the numeric representation.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: Examine compiler warnings closely and eliminate problems with potential security implications, such as signed / unsigned mismatch in memory operations, or use of uninitialized variables. Even if the weakness is rarely exploitable, a single failure may lead to the compromise of the entire system.

CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place. The login application should be protected against DoS attacks as much as possible. Limiting the database access, perhaps by caching result sets, can help minimize the resources expended. To further limit the potential for a DoS attack, consider tracking the rate of requests received from users and blocking requests that exceed a defined rate threshold.
  • Architecture and Design: Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed. The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question. The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute -- and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
  • Implementation: Ensure that all failures in resource allocation place the system into a safe posture.

References

Advisories

Packages

Other links

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-gjh7-xx4r-x345
TensorFlow has segfault in array_ops.upper_bound
High Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-fxgc-95xx-grvq
TensorFlow Denial of Service vulnerability
Medium Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-93vr-9q9m-pj8p
TensorFlow vulnerable to Out-of-Bounds Read in DynamicStitch
High Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-qjqc-vqcf-5qvj
TensorFlow vulnerable to seg fault in `tf.raw_ops.Print`
High Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-7jvm-xxmr-v5cw
TensorFlow vulnerable to integer overflow in EditDistance
High Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-64jg-wjww-7c5w
TensorFlow has Null Pointer Error in TensorArrayConcatV2
High Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-6hg6-5c2q-7rcr
TensorFlow has Heap-buffer-overflow in AvgPoolGrad
High Also affects tensorflow
GHSA-558h-mq8x-7q9g
TensorFlow has Null Pointer Error in SparseSparseMaximum
High Also affects tensorflow
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor