[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181008180346.GA9504@unicorn.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:03:47 +0200
From: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To: Wenwen Wang <wang6495@....edu>
Cc: Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>,
Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>,
Alan Brady <alan.brady@...el.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ethtool: fix a privilege escalation bug
On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 10:49:35AM -0500, Wenwen Wang wrote:
> In dev_ethtool(), the eth command 'ethcmd' is firstly copied from the
> use-space buffer 'useraddr' and checked to see whether it is
> ETHTOOL_PERQUEUE. If yes, the sub-command 'sub_cmd' is further copied from
> the user space. Otherwise, 'sub_cmd' is the same as 'ethcmd'. Next,
> according to 'sub_cmd', a permission check is enforced through the function
> ns_capable(). For example, the permission check is required if 'sub_cmd' is
> ETHTOOL_SCOALESCE, but it is not necessary if 'sub_cmd' is
> ETHTOOL_GCOALESCE, as suggested in the comment "Allow some commands to be
> done by anyone". The following execution invokes different handlers
> according to 'ethcmd'. Specifically, if 'ethcmd' is ETHTOOL_PERQUEUE,
> ethtool_set_per_queue() is called. In ethtool_set_per_queue(), the kernel
> object 'per_queue_opt' is copied again from the user-space buffer
> 'useraddr' and 'per_queue_opt.sub_command' is used to determine which
> operation should be performed. Given that the buffer 'useraddr' is in the
> user space, a malicious user can race to change the sub-command between the
> two copies. In particular, the attacker can supply ETHTOOL_PERQUEUE and
> ETHTOOL_GCOALESCE to bypass the permission check in dev_ethtool(). Then
> before ethtool_set_per_queue() is called, the attacker changes
> ETHTOOL_GCOALESCE to ETHTOOL_SCOALESCE. In this way, the attacker can
> bypass the permission check and execute ETHTOOL_SCOALESCE.
>
> This patch enforces a check in ethtool_set_per_queue() after the second
> copy from 'useraddr'. If the sub-command is different from the one obtained
> in the first copy in dev_ethtool(), an error code EINVAL will be returned.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wenwen Wang <wang6495@....edu>
Reviewed-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
I'm just not sure if "privilege escalation" is an appropriate term but
at least some sources define it loosely enough to cover also a simple
permission check bypass like this.
Michal Kubecek
> ---
> net/core/ethtool.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/ethtool.c b/net/core/ethtool.c
> index c9993c6..ccb337e 100644
> --- a/net/core/ethtool.c
> +++ b/net/core/ethtool.c
> @@ -2462,13 +2462,17 @@ static int ethtool_set_per_queue_coalesce(struct net_device *dev,
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static int ethtool_set_per_queue(struct net_device *dev, void __user *useraddr)
> +static int ethtool_set_per_queue(struct net_device *dev,
> + void __user *useraddr, u32 sub_cmd)
> {
> struct ethtool_per_queue_op per_queue_opt;
>
> if (copy_from_user(&per_queue_opt, useraddr, sizeof(per_queue_opt)))
> return -EFAULT;
>
> + if (per_queue_opt.sub_command != sub_cmd)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> switch (per_queue_opt.sub_command) {
> case ETHTOOL_GCOALESCE:
> return ethtool_get_per_queue_coalesce(dev, useraddr, &per_queue_opt);
> @@ -2838,7 +2842,7 @@ int dev_ethtool(struct net *net, struct ifreq *ifr)
> rc = ethtool_get_phy_stats(dev, useraddr);
> break;
> case ETHTOOL_PERQUEUE:
> - rc = ethtool_set_per_queue(dev, useraddr);
> + rc = ethtool_set_per_queue(dev, useraddr, sub_cmd);
> break;
> case ETHTOOL_GLINKSETTINGS:
> rc = ethtool_get_link_ksettings(dev, useraddr);
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists