netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] ROSE: prevent heap corruption with bad facilities

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: <20110401122938.GA2908@midget.suse.cz>
Date:	Fri, 1 Apr 2011 14:29:38 +0200
From:	Jiri Bohac <jbohac@...e.cz>
To:	Jiri Bohac <jbohac@...e.cz>
Cc:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, security@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ROSE: prevent heap corruption with bad facilities

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 08:02:25PM +0200, Jiri Bohac wrote:
> However, I wonder how much sense it makes to continue parsing the
> facilities if an unknown facility family appears. We don't know
> the length of its data, so we will interpret each 16 bytes a new

oops, typo:
s/16 bytes a new/16 bits as a new/

> facilities header, hopefully soon bailing out on *p != 0x00.
> 
> In case of a long packet where every other byte is zero, the loop
> will spam the kernel log with the printk ... which could probably
> be classified as a security problem on its own. So how about the
> following instead? I have no idea if this breaks some rose
> specification, though. 
-- 
Jiri Bohac <jbohac@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, SUSE CZ

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html