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: <CAHmME9or-Wwx63ZtwYzOWV9KQJY1aarx2Eh8iF2P--BXfz6u+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 Feb 2020 12:44:06 +0100
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        syzbot <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
        WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@...ts.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: syzkaller wireguard key situation [was: Re: [PATCH net-next v2]
 net: WireGuard secure network tunnel]

Observation:

It seems to be starting to synthesize packets sent to the wireguard
socket. These aren't the proper handshake packets generated internally
by that triangle commit, but rather ones that syzkaller creates
itself. That's why we have coverage on wg_receive, which otherwise
wouldn't be called from a userspace process, since syzbot is sending
its own packets to that function.

However, the packets it generates aren't getting very far, failing all
of the tests in validate_header_len. None of those checks are at all
cryptographic, which means it should be able to hit those eventually.
Anything we should be doing to help it out? After it gets past that
check, it'll wind up in the handshake queue or the data queue, and
then (in theory) it should be rejected on a cryptographic basis. But
maybe syzbot will figure out how to crash it instead :-P.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ