I have two binaries, and I'd like to study CVE-2023-21273. The following patch fixes this CVE:

diff

libbluetooth.so_new is a bluetooth driver that has already fixed this CVE. The corresponding function that was affected was at 0x4f2bf0. Now I'm given an unknown binary libbluetooth.so_old. Can you help me analyze if the vulnerability exisits in this unknown binary?

Tool call: get_similar_function with args: {"function":"0x4f2bf0"} succeeded

Tool call: decompile_function_by_address with args: {"address":"0x4f2bf0"} succeeded

Tool call: decompile_function_by_address with args: {"address":"0x4f2858"} succeeded

I diff’d the SDP_AddAttribute implementations in the two .so’s and confirmed the key guard added by the patch is missing in the “old” library._

Specifically, in the new build (at 0x4f2bf0) you see:

c

In the old build (at 0x4f2858) none of those early returns on p_val == NULL or free‐pad/full‐pad checks appear. Worse, the old version immediately dereferences p_val in some debug‐logging branches (*p_val, p_val[length-1]) without ever null‐checking it. That means if you ever call SDP_AddAttribute with a zero pointer you can crash or corrupt memory.*_

Conclusion: libbluetooth.so_old (0x4f2858) is vulnerable to CVE-2023-21273. You’ll want to upgrade to the “new” build or back‐port the same null checks._