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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 18:15:12 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> To: Martin Schiller <ms@....tdt.de> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-x25@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Hendry <andrew.hendry@...il.com>, kiyin(尹亮) <kiyin@...cent.com>, security@...nel.org, linux-distros@...openwall.org, huntchen(陈阳) <huntchen@...cent.com>, dannywang(王宇) <dannywang@...cent.com>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH net v2] net/x25: prevent a couple of overflows The .x25_addr[] address comes from the user and is not necessarily NUL terminated. This leads to a couple problems. The first problem is that the strlen() in x25_bind() can read beyond the end of the buffer. The second problem is more subtle and could result in memory corruption. The call tree is: x25_connect() --> x25_write_internal() --> x25_addr_aton() The .x25_addr[] buffers are copied to the "addresses" buffer from x25_write_internal() so it will lead to stack corruption. Verify that the strings are NUL terminated and return -EINVAL if they are not. Reported-by: "kiyin(尹亮)" <kiyin@...cent.com> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> --- The first patch put a NUL terminator on the end of the string and this patch returns an error instead. I don't have a strong preference, which patch to go with. net/x25/af_x25.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/x25/af_x25.c b/net/x25/af_x25.c index 9232cdb42ad9..d41fffb2507b 100644 --- a/net/x25/af_x25.c +++ b/net/x25/af_x25.c @@ -675,7 +675,8 @@ static int x25_bind(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr, int addr_len) int len, i, rc = 0; if (addr_len != sizeof(struct sockaddr_x25) || - addr->sx25_family != AF_X25) { + addr->sx25_family != AF_X25 || + strnlen(addr->sx25_addr.x25_addr, X25_ADDR_LEN) == X25_ADDR_LEN) { rc = -EINVAL; goto out; } @@ -769,7 +770,8 @@ static int x25_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr, rc = -EINVAL; if (addr_len != sizeof(struct sockaddr_x25) || - addr->sx25_family != AF_X25) + addr->sx25_family != AF_X25 || + strnlen(addr->sx25_addr.x25_addr, X25_ADDR_LEN) == X25_ADDR_LEN) goto out; rc = -ENETUNREACH; -- 2.29.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists