Reminder: Improper Control of Generation of Code
CVE-2022-22285 is a high-severity improper control of generation of code vulnerability in Reminder from Samsung, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.29% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of Reminder you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
- Read the advisory on security.samsungmobile.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Samsung Mobile | Reminder | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 4.4 | Medium | CNA (samsung.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.1 | High | NVD |
| CVSS 2.0 | 3.6 | Low | NVD |
Official description
A vulnerability using PendingIntent in Reminder prior to version 12.2.05.0 in Android R(11.0) and 12.3.02.1000 in Android S(12.0) allows attackers to execute privileged action by hijacking and modifying the intent.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Control of Generation of Code
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
- Run your code in a jail or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
- Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
More Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities (CWE-94)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Recent Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities
- 7.1 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 10.0 Critical severity
- 7.8 High severity
ExifTool Remote Code Execution Exploited
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
Pulse Connect Secure Code Injection Exploited
Spotted an error? Tell us.