Comment

Comment on Incomplete disclosures by Apple and Google create “huge blindspot” for 0-day hunters

GamingChairModel@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

Summary:

Apple disclosed and patched an actively exploited vulnerability in its proprietary image processing library.

At the same time, Google disclosed and patched an actively exploited vulnerability in its own webp processing in Chrome.

The timing and similarity highly suggests this is a problem with how almost all software has implemented the webp standard in its image processing software. Because processing webp files is such a fundamental function of any different pieces of software, there’s a concern that this is one vulnerability common to a huge set of commonly used software.

I wonder if this vulnerability is especially serious, given that the programs processing images often have escalated privileges.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

The timing and similarity highly suggests this is a problem with how almost all software has implemented the webp standard in its image processing software.

Did you read the article or the post? The point was that both places where the vulnerability was found probably used libwepb. So it’s not that there’s something inherently vulnerable in handling webp, just that they both used the same library which had a vulnerability. (Presumably the article was a little vague about the Apple side because the source wasn’t open/available.)

given that the programs processing images often have escalated privileges.

What? That sounds like a really strange thing to say. I guess one could argue it’s technically true because browsers can be considered “a program that processes images” and a browser component can end up in stuff with escalated privileges. That’s kind of a special case though and in general there’s no reason for the vast majority of programs that process images to have special privileges.

source
- GamingChairModel@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  
  So it’s not that there’s something inherently vulnerable in handling webp, just that they both used the same library which had a vulnerability. (Presumably the article was a little vague about the Apple side because the source wasn’t open/available.)
  
  I don’t think it’s inherent to how webp is processed, just a common denominator somewhere between Chrome’s implementation (which uses libwebp) and Apple’s proprietary implementation (which might or might not use libwebp). Whether Apple uses libwebp or not, it still has important implications that the most common methods to implement webp support were vulnerable: if the problem is with libwebp, well a shitload of software uses libwebp. If the problem is with some proprietary Apple code and libwebp at the same time, well that’s also concerning.
  
  That sounds like a really strange thing to say.
  
  I was thinking specifically of core OS functionality that uses image processing: file browsers that use thumbnails/previews, lock screens/screen savers/login screens that display images over stuff that shouldn’t be visible, notification panels that might show thumbnails, etc. Browsers are at least sandboxed, but I’m not sure the same is always true of everything else that needs to process image data.
  
  source
cheese_greater@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
At a certain point I’m left wondering the degree to which this is not a conspiracy, maybe additionally involving the other big guy three-letter agency(ies)

source