Skip to content

Heap Out-of-Bounds Read in HandleUltraZipBPP due to unchecked subrectangle count

Moderate
bk138 published GHSA-87q7-v983-qwcj Mar 24, 2026

Package

LibVNC/libvncserver

Affected versions

<= 0.9.15

Patched versions

None

Description

Summary

A heap out-of-bounds read vulnerability exists in the LibVNCClient UltraZip encoding handler (HandleUltraZipBPP in src/libvncclient/ultra.c). A malicious VNC server can send a crafted FramebufferUpdate message with an attacker-controlled subrectangle count, causing the client to read beyond the bounds of a heap buffer. This leads to information disclosure or denial of service (crash). No authentication is required on the server side (rfbSecTypeNone), and UltraZip encoding is enabled by default in LibVNCClient.

Details

The function HandleUltraZipBPP() (ultra.c, line 122) processes UltraZip-encoded FramebufferUpdate rectangles. For this encoding, the outer rectangle header fields have special semantics — rect.r.x represents the number of sub-rectangles (numCacheRects).

At line 130, numCacheRects is assigned directly from the attacker-controlled rx parameter:

unsigned int numCacheRects = rx;

The subrectangle parsing loop at line 197 iterates numCacheRects times. Each iteration advances the ptr pointer by at least 12 bytes (lines 202–206):

for (i=0; i<numCacheRects; i++)
{
    unsigned short sx, sy, sw, sh;
    unsigned int se;

    memcpy((char *)&sx, ptr, 2); ptr += 2;
    memcpy((char *)&sy, ptr, 2); ptr += 2;
    memcpy((char *)&sw, ptr, 2); ptr += 2;
    memcpy((char *)&sh, ptr, 2); ptr += 2;
    memcpy((char *)&se, ptr, 4); ptr += 4;

No bounds check is performed to ensure ptr remains within raw_buffer.

Crucially, the standard bounds check in rfbclient.c is explicitly skipped for UltraZip encoding (line 2250):

if (rect.encoding != rfbEncodingUltraZip)
{
    if ((rect.r.x + rect.r.w > client->width) || ...)

This means the attacker-controlled rect.r.x (used as numCacheRects) reaches HandleUltraZipBPP completely unchecked.

Relationship to existing CVEs:

  • CVE-2016-9941 added CheckRect() inside GotBitmap/CopyRectangle, which prevents OOB writes to the framebuffer. However, the ptr advancement via memcpy in the subrect header parsing (lines 202–206) remains unguarded, making the OOB read the remaining exploitable primitive.
  • CVE-2016-9942 changed the LZO decompression function to its safe variant but did not modify the subrectangle parsing loop.

PoC

  1. Set up a malicious VNC server that:
    • Advertises RFB protocol version 3.8
    • Offers security type rfbSecTypeNone (type 1, no authentication)
    • Sends a ServerInit message with arbitrary framebuffer dimensions (e.g., 100×100)
  2. Wait for a LibVNCClient-based viewer to connect
  3. After connection setup, send a FramebufferUpdate message containing one rectangle with:
    • rect.encoding = 0xFFFF0009 (rfbEncodingUltraZip)
    • rect.r.x = 10000 (interpreted as numCacheRects)
    • rect.r.y = 100
    • rect.r.w = 1
    • rect.r.h = 0
  4. Follow with an LZO-compressed payload containing a small valid LZO stream (e.g., 120 bytes of decompressed data)
  5. The client decompresses the data into raw_buffer (~66 KB), then enters the subrect parsing loop which iterates 10,000 times × 12 bytes = 120,000 bytes, reading ~54 KB beyond the buffer boundary

Impact

Heap out-of-bounds read — A malicious VNC server can cause any VNC client built on LibVNCClient to read up to tens of kilobytes of heap memory beyond the allocated buffer. This can result in:

  • Information disclosure: sensitive data from adjacent heap allocations may be leaked
  • Denial of service: crash due to reading unmapped memory

Any application using LibVNCClient is affected when connecting to an untrusted VNC server. UltraZip encoding is registered by default in SetFormatAndEncodings() (rfbclient.c, lines 1384–1385).

Severity

Moderate

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 None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity None
Availability Low
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

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:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

CVE ID

CVE-2026-32853

Weaknesses

Out-of-bounds Read

The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer. Learn more on MITRE.

Credits