[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180710182459.826091949@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:24:52 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>, stable@...nel.org
Subject: [PATCH 4.14 16/53] ext4: add corruption check in ext4_xattr_set_entry()
4.14-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
commit 5369a762c882c0b6e9599e4ebbb3a9ba9eee7e2d upstream.
In theory this should have been caught earlier when the xattr list was
verified, but in case it got missed, it's simple enough to add check
to make sure we don't overrun the xattr buffer.
This addresses CVE-2018-10879.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200001
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
Cc: stable@...nel.org
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
fs/ext4/xattr.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/ext4/xattr.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/xattr.c
@@ -1559,7 +1559,7 @@ static int ext4_xattr_set_entry(struct e
handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
bool is_block)
{
- struct ext4_xattr_entry *last;
+ struct ext4_xattr_entry *last, *next;
struct ext4_xattr_entry *here = s->here;
size_t min_offs = s->end - s->base, name_len = strlen(i->name);
int in_inode = i->in_inode;
@@ -1594,7 +1594,13 @@ static int ext4_xattr_set_entry(struct e
/* Compute min_offs and last. */
last = s->first;
- for (; !IS_LAST_ENTRY(last); last = EXT4_XATTR_NEXT(last)) {
+ for (; !IS_LAST_ENTRY(last); last = next) {
+ next = EXT4_XATTR_NEXT(last);
+ if ((void *)next >= s->end) {
+ EXT4_ERROR_INODE(inode, "corrupted xattr entries");
+ ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
+ goto out;
+ }
if (!last->e_value_inum && last->e_value_size) {
size_t offs = le16_to_cpu(last->e_value_offs);
if (offs < min_offs)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists