[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120309163300.GC1925@taz.hsc.fr>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 17:33:00 +0100
From: Christophe Alladoum <Christophe.Alladoum@....fr>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Romain Coltel <Romain.Coltel@....fr>
Subject: Possible integer overflow in ping_common.c
Hi list,
A collegue and I found a possible integer overflow in ping_common.c that could
lead to excessive CPU usage when triggered.
PoC :
{{{
$ ping -i 3600 google.com
PING google.com (173.194.66.102) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from we-in-f102.1e100.net (173.194.66.102): icmp_req=1 ttl=50 time=11.4 ms
[...]
(check your CPU usage)
}}}
Here, ping will loop in main_loop() loop in this section of code :
{{{
/* from iputils-s20101006 source */
/* ping_common.c */
546 void main_loop(int icmp_sock, __u8 *packet, int packlen)
547 {
[...]
559 for (;;) {
[...]
572 do {
573 next = pinger();
574 next = schedule_exit(next);
575 } while (next <= 0);
[...]
588 if ((options & (F_ADAPTIVE|F_FLOOD_POLL)) || next<SCHINT(interval)) {
[...]
593 if (1000*next <= 1000000/(int)HZ) {
}}}
If interval parameter (-i) is set, then condition L593 will overflow, making
this statement "always true" for big values (e.g. -i 3600). As a consequence,
ping process will start looping actively as long as condition is true (could be
pretty long).
Tested on Fedora/Debian/Gentoo Linux system (2.6.x x86_32 and x86_64) on iputils
version 20101006. ping6 seems also to be affected since it's relying on
ping_common.c functions.
Quick'n dirty patch (full patch in appendix) is to cast test result as long long:
{{{
593 if (((long long)1000*next) <= (long long)1000000/(int)HZ) {
}}}
Can you confirm this bug?
Thanks
--
Christophe Alladoum - <christophe.alladoum@....fr>
Hervé Schauer Consultants - <http://www.hsc.fr>
View attachment "ping_interger_overflow.patch" of type "text/plain" (527 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists