linux-kernel - [17/74] e1000: enhance frame fragment detection

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

Message-Id: <20100204171458.220472073@linux.site>
Date:	Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:11:48 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Cc:	stable-review@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: [17/74] e1000: enhance frame fragment detection

2.6.32-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>

commit 40a14deaf411592b57cb0720f0e8004293ab9865 upstream.

Originally From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
Modified by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>

Hey all-
	A security discussion was recently given:
http://events.ccc.de/congress/2009/Fahrplan//events/3596.en.html
And a patch that I submitted awhile back was brought up.  Apparently some of
their testing revealed that they were able to force a buffer fragment in e1000
in which the trailing fragment was greater than 4 bytes.  As a result the
fragment check I introduced failed to detect the fragement and a partial
invalid frame was passed up into the network stack.  I've written this patch
to correct it.  I'm in the process of testing it now, but it makes good
logical sense to me.  Effectively it maintains a per-adapter state variable
which detects a non-EOP frame, and discards it and subsequent non-EOP frames
leading up to _and_ _including_ the next positive-EOP frame (as it is by
definition the last fragment).  This should prevent any and all partial frames
from entering the network stack from e1000.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

---
 drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h      |    2 ++
 drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c |   13 +++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
@@ -326,6 +326,8 @@ struct e1000_adapter {
 	/* for ioport free */
 	int bars;
 	int need_ioport;
+
+	bool discarding;
 };
 
 enum e1000_state_t {
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
@@ -3827,13 +3827,22 @@ static bool e1000_clean_rx_irq(struct e1
 
 		length = le16_to_cpu(rx_desc->length);
 		/* !EOP means multiple descriptors were used to store a single
-		 * packet, also make sure the frame isn't just CRC only */
-		if (unlikely(!(status & E1000_RXD_STAT_EOP) || (length <= 4))) {
+		 * packet, if thats the case we need to toss it.  In fact, we
+		 * to toss every packet with the EOP bit clear and the next
+		 * frame that _does_ have the EOP bit set, as it is by
+		 * definition only a frame fragment
+		 */
+		if (unlikely(!(status & E1000_RXD_STAT_EOP)))
+			adapter->discarding = true;
+
+		if (adapter->discarding) {
 			/* All receives must fit into a single buffer */
 			E1000_DBG("%s: Receive packet consumed multiple"
 				  " buffers\n", netdev->name);
 			/* recycle */
 			buffer_info->skb = skb;
+			if (status & E1000_RXD_STAT_EOP)
+				adapter->discarding = false;
 			goto next_desc;
 		}
 


--
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/