Skip to content

Denial of Service in Tensorflow

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Sep 24, 2020 in tensorflow/tensorflow • Updated Oct 28, 2024

Package

pip tensorflow (pip)

Affected versions

< 1.15.4
>= 2.0.0, < 2.0.3
>= 2.1.0, < 2.1.2
= 2.2.0
= 2.3.0

Patched versions

1.15.4
2.0.3
2.1.2
2.2.1
2.3.1
pip tensorflow-cpu (pip)
< 1.15.4
>= 2.0.0, < 2.0.3
>= 2.1.0, < 2.1.2
= 2.2.0
= 2.3.0
1.15.4
2.0.3
2.1.2
2.2.1
2.3.1
pip tensorflow-gpu (pip)
< 1.15.4
>= 2.0.0, < 2.0.3
>= 2.1.0, < 2.1.2
= 2.2.0
= 2.3.0
1.15.4
2.0.3
2.1.2
2.2.1
2.3.1

Description

Impact

Changing the TensorFlow's SavedModel protocol buffer and altering the name of required keys results in segfaults and data corruption while loading the model. This can cause a denial of service in products using tensorflow-serving or other inference-as-a-service installments.

We have added fixes to this in f760f88b4267d981e13f4b302c437ae800445968 and fcfef195637c6e365577829c4d67681695956e7d (both going into TensorFlow 2.2.0 and 2.3.0 but not yet backported to earlier versions). However, this was not enough, as #41097 reports a different failure mode.

Patches

We have patched the issue in adf095206f25471e864a8e63a0f1caef53a0e3a6 and will release patch releases for all versions between 1.15 and 2.3. Patch releases for versions between 1.15 and 2.1 will also contain cherry-picks of f760f88b4267d981e13f4b302c437ae800445968 and fcfef195637c6e365577829c4d67681695956e7d.

We recommend users to upgrade to TensorFlow 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1, or 2.3.1.

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 Shuaike Dong, from Alipay Tian Qian Security Lab && Lab for Applied Security Research, CUHK.

References

@mihaimaruseac mihaimaruseac published to tensorflow/tensorflow Sep 24, 2020
Reviewed Sep 25, 2020
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 25, 2020
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Sep 25, 2020
Last updated Oct 28, 2024

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H

EPSS score

0.196%
(57th percentile)

Weaknesses

CVE ID

CVE-2020-15206

GHSA ID

GHSA-w5gh-2wr2-pm6g

Source code

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.