[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151215.153626.1500179484827859040.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 15:36:26 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: dvyukov@...gle.com
Cc: lauro.venancio@...nbossa.org, aloisio.almeida@...nbossa.org,
sameo@...ux.intel.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
syzkaller@...glegroups.com, edumazet@...gle.com, kcc@...gle.com,
glider@...gle.com, sasha.levin@...cle.com
Subject: Re: Information leak in llcp_sock_bind/llcp_raw_sock_bind
From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 21:00:20 +0100
> The problem is that llcp_sock_bind/llcp_raw_sock_bind do not check
> sockaddr_len passed in, so they copy stack garbage from stack into the
> socket and then return it in getsockname.
> This can defeat ASLR, leak crypto keys, etc.
That's actually the first thing these functions do.
They completely clear out the on-stack llcp_addr, then they copy only
as much as the user gave them, being careful not to use more than
sizeof(llcp_addr).
memset(&llcp_addr, 0, sizeof(llcp_addr));
len = min_t(unsigned int, sizeof(llcp_addr), alen);
memcpy(&llcp_addr, addr, len);
I don't see what the problem is, you'll need to be more specific.
Even wrt. llcp_sock->service_name, the code limits the string to
NFC_LLCP_MAX_SERVICE_NAME.
--
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