[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200327081007.1185-4-steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 09:10:02 +0100
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/8] xfrm: fix uctx len check in verify_sec_ctx_len
From: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
It's not sufficient to do 'uctx->len != (sizeof(struct xfrm_user_sec_ctx) +
uctx->ctx_len)' check only, as uctx->len may be greater than nla_len(rt),
in which case it will cause slab-out-of-bounds when accessing uctx->ctx_str
later.
This patch is to fix it by return -EINVAL when uctx->len > nla_len(rt).
Fixes: df71837d5024 ("[LSM-IPSec]: Security association restriction.")
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
---
net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
index b88ba45ff1ac..38ff02d31402 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
@@ -110,7 +110,8 @@ static inline int verify_sec_ctx_len(struct nlattr **attrs)
return 0;
uctx = nla_data(rt);
- if (uctx->len != (sizeof(struct xfrm_user_sec_ctx) + uctx->ctx_len))
+ if (uctx->len > nla_len(rt) ||
+ uctx->len != (sizeof(struct xfrm_user_sec_ctx) + uctx->ctx_len))
return -EINVAL;
return 0;
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists