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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 5 May 2020 23:50:28 +0800
From:   Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
To:     davem@...emloft.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, kuba@...nel.org,
        christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr, leon@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [BUG] net: chelsio: Possible buffer overflow caused by DMA
 failures/attacks

In alloc_rx_resources():
     sge->respQ.entries =
         pci_alloc_consistent(pdev, size, &sge->respQ.dma_addr);

Thus, "sge->respQ.entries" is a DMA value, and it is assigned to
"e" in process_pure_responses():
     struct sge *sge = adapter->sge;
     struct respQ *q = &sge->respQ;
     struct respQ_e *e = &q->entries[q->cidx];

When DMA failures or attacks occur, the data stored in "e" can be
changed at any time. In this case, the value of "e->FreelistQid"
can be a large number to cause buffer overflow when the
following code is executed:
     const struct freelQ *fl = &sge->freelQ[e->FreelistQid];

Similarly, "sge->respQ.entries" is also assigned to "e" in
process_responses():
     struct sge *sge = adapter->sge;
     struct respQ *q = &sge->respQ;
     struct respQ_e *e = &q->entries[q->cidx];

When DMA failures or attacks occur, the data stored in "e" can be
changed at any time. In this case, the value of "e->FreelistQid"
can be a large number to cause buffer overflow when the
following code is executed:
     struct freelQ *fl = &sge->freelQ[e->FreelistQid];

Considering that DMA can fail or be attacked, I think that it is 
dangerous to
use a DMA value (or any value tainted by it) as an array index or a 
control-flow
condition. However, I have found many such dangerous cases in Linux 
device drivers
through my static-analysis tool and code review.
I am not sure whether my opinion is correct, so I want to listen to your 
points of view.
Thanks in advance :)


Best wishes,
Jia-Ju Bai

Powered by blists - more mailing lists