netdev - [PATCH v2 1/6] netfilter: sanity checks on NFPROTO

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]

Date:	Mon, 14 May 2012 17:04:10 +0100
From:	Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>
To:	Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>
Cc:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Vincent Sanders <vincent.sanders@...labora.co.uk>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] netfilter: sanity checks on NFPROTO_NUMPROTO

Le Mon, 14 May 2012 16:39:49 +0100,
Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk> a écrit :

> Le Mon, 14 May 2012 16:42:35 +0200,
> Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org> a écrit :
> 
> > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 02:56:34PM +0100, Alban Crequy wrote:
> > > With the NFPROTO_* constants introduced by commit 7e9c6e
> > > ("netfilter: Introduce NFPROTO_* constants"), it is too easy to
> > > confuse PF_* and NFPROTO_* constants in new protocols.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>
> > > Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas
> > > <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk> Reviewed-by: Vincent Sanders
> > > <vincent.sanders@...labora.co.uk> ---
> > >  net/netfilter/core.c |    5 +++++
> > >  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/core.c b/net/netfilter/core.c
> > > index e1b7e05..4f16552 100644
> > > --- a/net/netfilter/core.c
> > > +++ b/net/netfilter/core.c
> > > @@ -67,6 +67,11 @@ int nf_register_hook(struct nf_hook_ops *reg)
> > >  	struct nf_hook_ops *elem;
> > >  	int err;
> > >  
> > > +	if (reg->pf >= NFPROTO_NUMPROTO || reg->hooknum >=
> > > NF_MAX_HOOKS) {
> > > +		BUG();
> > > +		return 1;
> > 
> > nf_register_hook returns a negative value on error. -EINVAL can be
> > fine.
> 
> Is it the patch you mean? Do you want me to do a series repost?

Please disregard the previous patch, this is the correct one.


From: Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>

netfilter: sanity checks on NFPROTO_NUMPROTO

With the NFPROTO_* constants introduced by commit 7e9c6e ("netfilter: Introduce
NFPROTO_* constants"), it is too easy to confuse PF_* and NFPROTO_* constants
in new protocols.

Signed-off-by: Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>
---
 net/netfilter/core.c |    8 ++++++++
 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/netfilter/core.c b/net/netfilter/core.c
index e1b7e05..7422989 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/core.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/core.c
@@ -67,6 +67,14 @@ int nf_register_hook(struct nf_hook_ops *reg)
 	struct nf_hook_ops *elem;
 	int err;
 
+	if (reg->pf >= NFPROTO_NUMPROTO || reg->hooknum >= NF_MAX_HOOKS) {
+		WARN(reg->pf >= NFPROTO_NUMPROTO,
+		     "netfilter: Invalid nfproto %d\n", reg->pf);
+		WARN(reg->hooknum >= NF_MAX_HOOKS,
+		     "netfilter: Invalid hooknum %d\n", reg->hooknum);
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+
 	err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&nf_hook_mutex);
 	if (err < 0)
 		return err;
-- 
1.7.2.5

--
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