Memory Corruption vulnerability in DXE driver.
BINARLY efiXplorer team has discovered an integer overflow on memory allocation size that leads to OOB Write operations during PNG file processing in AMI firmware.
Image preview
Potential Impact
An attacker with local access can exploit this vulnerability to elevate privileges from ring 3 or ring 0 (depends on the operating system) to a DXE driver and execute arbitrary code. Malicious code installed as a result of this exploitation could survive operating system (OS) boot process and runtime, or modify NVRAM area on the SPI flash storage (to gain persistence). Additionally, threat actors could use this vulnerability to bypass OS security mechanisms (modify privileged memory or runtime variables), influence OS boot process, and in some cases allow an attacker to hook or modify EFI Runtime services.
Image preview
Vulnerability Information
- BINARLY internal vulnerability identifier: BRLY-LOGOFAIL-2023-018
- AMI PSIRT assigned CVE identifier: CVE-2023-39538
- CVSS v3.1: 8.2 High AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Image preview
Affected modules
| Module name | Module GUID | Module SHA256 |
|---|---|---|
AMITSE | b1da0adf-4f77-4070-a88e-bffe1c60529a | 439e73d391b7f7540f6faa58afdc2722bda250468d4a4f7f5f84228c1f77ddbe |
Image preview
Vulnerability description
The pseudocode of the vulnerable function is shown below:
unsigned __int64 sub_59844()
{
unsigned int length; // ebx
bool v1; // zf
int width; // ecx
int heigth; // eax
void *ZeroPool; // rax
unsigned __int64 result; // rax
void *OutputBufferVar; // rax
__int64 v7; // rcx
length = 0;
if ( ColorType )
{
switch ( ColorType )
{
case 2:
v1 = ((BitDepth - 8) & 0xFFFFFFF7) == 0;
break;
case 3:
v1 = ((BitDepth - 4) & 0xFFFFFFFB) == 0;
break;
case 4:
case 6:
v1 = BitDepth == 8;
break;
default:
return 0x8000000000000003ui64;
}
if ( v1 )
goto LABEL_8;
return 0x8000000000000003ui64;
}
if ( BitDepth != 1 && BitDepth != 8 )
return 0x8000000000000003ui64;
LABEL_8:
width = PngWidth;
heigth = PngHeight;
dword_9733C = PngWidth;
dword_97340 = PngHeight;
if ( dword_97350 == 1 && qword_97348 )
{
sub_4654(&qword_97348);
heigth = dword_97340;
width = dword_9733C;
qword_97348 = 0i64;
}
// BRLY-LOGOFAIL-2023-018: Integer overflow on the allocation size
ZeroPool = AllocateZeroPool(4 * width * heigth);
dword_97358 = -1;
qword_97348 = (__int64)ZeroPool;
dword_9735C = 0;
dword_97354 = 0;
qword_97364 = 0i64;
dword_97360 = 1;
dword_9737C = 0;
dword_97380 = 1;
if ( OutputBuffer )
sub_4654(&OutputBuffer);
switch ( ColorType )
{
case 0:
if ( BitDepth != 1 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 2 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 4 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 8 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 16 )
goto LABEL_47;
goto LABEL_43;
}
LABEL_33:
length = PngWidth;
goto LABEL_47;
}
LABEL_44:
length = (unsigned int)(PngWidth + 1) >> 1;
goto LABEL_47;
}
LABEL_45:
length = (unsigned int)(PngWidth + 3) >> 2;
goto LABEL_47;
}
LABEL_46:
length = (unsigned int)(PngWidth + 7) >> 3;
goto LABEL_47;
case 2:
if ( BitDepth == 8 )
{
length = 3 * PngWidth;
}
else if ( BitDepth == 16 )
{
length = 6 * PngWidth;
}
goto LABEL_47;
case 3:
if ( BitDepth != 1 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 2 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 4 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 8 )
goto LABEL_47;
goto LABEL_33;
}
goto LABEL_44;
}
goto LABEL_45;
}
goto LABEL_46;
}
if ( ColorType != 4 )
{
if ( ColorType == 6 )
{
if ( BitDepth != 8 )
{
if ( BitDepth == 16 )
length = 8 * PngWidth;
goto LABEL_47;
}
goto LABEL_28;
}
goto LABEL_47;
}
if ( BitDepth == 8 )
{
LABEL_43:
length = 2 * PngWidth;
goto LABEL_47;
}
if ( BitDepth == 16 )
LABEL_28:
length = 4 * PngWidth;
LABEL_47:
OutputBufferVar = AllocateZeroPool(2 * length);
v7 = (__int64)OutputBufferVar + length;
OutputBuffer = (__int64)OutputBufferVar;
qword_97390 = (__int64)OutputBufferVar;
result = 0i64;
qword_97398 = v7;
return result;
}
As we can see from the pseudocode, the width and height variables are not validated. The attacker can arbitrarly set these variables and thus trigger an integer overflow when ZeroPool is initialized from EfiLibAllocateZeroPool((4 * width * height)). Since ZeroPool is used during the processing of the PNG image, the integer overflow forces the allocation of buffer that is too small to contain the intended data, thus creating an arbitrary heap overflow.
Image preview
Disclosure timeline
This bug is subject to a 90 day disclosure deadline. After 90 days elapsed or a patch has been made broadly available (whichever is earlier), the bug report will become visible to the public.
| Disclosure Activity | Date (YYYY-mm-dd) |
|---|---|
Lenovo PSIRT is notified | 2023-06-21 |
Lenovo ID (LEN-132940) is assigned | 2023-06-22 |
CERT/CC is notified | 2023-07-10 |
AMI PSIRT confirmed reported issues | 2023-10-05 |
AMI PSIRT assigned CVE ID | 2023-12-01 |
BINARLY public disclosure date | 2024-06-19 |
Image preview
Acknowledgements
Image preview
See if you are impacted now with our Firmware Vulnerability Scanner
Find Vulnerabilities, Generate SBOMs & CBOMs