[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131127115120.GC20630@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:51:20 +0100
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
security@...nel.org,
Jüri Aedla <juri.aedla@...il.com>,
stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2] net: heap overflow in __audit_sockaddr()
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:32:18AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
> > --- a/net/socket.c
> > +++ b/net/socket.c
> > @@ -1964,6 +1964,16 @@ struct used_address {
> > unsigned int name_len;
> > };
> >
> > +static int copy_msghdr_from_user(struct msghdr *kmsg,
> > + struct msghdr __user *umsg)
> > +{
> > + if (copy_from_user(kmsg, umsg, sizeof(struct msghdr)))
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > + if (kmsg->msg_namelen > sizeof(struct sockaddr_storage))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + return 0;
>
> Crap, this seems to break Ruby trunk :x
> https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9124
>
> I'm inclined to think Ruby is wrong to use a gigantic buffer, but this
> may also break some other existing userspace code. I'm not sure what
> the best option since breaking userspace (even buggy userspace?) is not
> taken lightly.
>
> Is there a different way to fix this in the kernel?
>
> Note: this doesn't affect a stable release of Ruby, yet.
We have to clamp msg_namelen to max sizeof(struct sockaddr_storage).
The sendmsg handler will check msg_namelen again and error out correctly if
the size of msg_name is too short.
Greetings,
Hannes
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists