linux-kernel - Re: Verification of SYScall changes because of CVE-2009-0029

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:46:29 +0200
From:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:	Mitchell Erblich <erblichs@...thlink.net>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Verification of SYScall changes because of CVE-2009-0029

Am 21.10.2010 07:40, schrieb Mitchell Erblich:
> he ABI in the Linux kernel 2.6.28 and earlier on s390, powerpc, sparc64, and mips
> 64-bit platforms requires that a 32-bit argument in a 64-bit register was properly
> sign extended when sent from a user-mode application, but cannot verify this, which
> allows local users to cause a denial of service (crash) or possibly gain privileges 
> via a crafted system call.
> 
> Has anyone been able to verify  (a program that exploits this issue) ?

I found the problem with crashme and I was able to reduce the test to a
5 line C program - so yes, the problem can happen for real. The thing is
that this was no generic exploit, the problem from the testcase existed 
only with specific gcc, kernel, syscall and architecture but there might
be others - we dont know. So sorry, there is no generic test case that 
checks if the problem is fixed.

Christian


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/