netdev - Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_conntrack_sip: fix the ct_sip_parse_numerical

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZEwdd7Xj4fQtCXoe@corigine.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2023 21:24:39 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To:     Gavrilov Ilia <Ilia.Gavrilov@...otecs.ru>
Cc:     Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
        "netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "coreteam@...filter.org" <coreteam@...filter.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lvc-project@...uxtesting.org" <lvc-project@...uxtesting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_conntrack_sip: fix the
 ct_sip_parse_numerical_param() return value.

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 03:04:31PM +0000, Gavrilov Ilia wrote:
> ct_sip_parse_numerical_param() returns only 0 or 1 now.
> But process_register_request() and process_register_response() imply
> checking for a negative value if parsing of a numerical header parameter
> failed. Let's fix it.
> 
> Found by InfoTeCS on behalf of Linux Verification Center
> (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
> 
> Fixes: 0f32a40fc91a ("[NETFILTER]: nf_conntrack_sip: create signalling expectations")
> Signed-off-by: Ilia.Gavrilov <Ilia.Gavrilov@...otecs.ru>

Hi Gavrilov,

although it is a slightly unusual convention for kernel code,
I believe the intention is that this function returns 0 when
it fails (to parse) and 1 on success. So I think that part is fine.

What seems a bit broken is the way that callers use the return value.

1. The call in process_register_response() looks like this:

	ret = ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(...)
	if (ret < 0) {
		nf_ct_helper_log(skb, ct, "cannot parse expires");
		return NF_DROP;
	}

    But ret can only be 0 or 1, so the error handling is never inoked,
    and a failure to parse is ignored. I guess failure doesn't occur in
    practice.

    I suspect this should be:

	ret = ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(...)
	if (!ret) {
		nf_ct_helper_log(skb, ct, "cannot parse expires");
		return NF_DROP;
	}

2. The callprocess_register_request() looks like this:

        if (ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(...)) {
                nf_ct_helper_log(skb, ct, "cannot parse expires");
                return NF_DROP;
        }

   But this seems to treat success as an error and vice versa.

        if (!ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(...)) {
                nf_ct_helper_log(skb, ct, "cannot parse expires");
                return NF_DROP;
        }

  Or, better:

        ret = ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(...);
	if (!ret) {
		...
	}


3. The invocation in nf_nat_sip() looks like this:

	if (ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(...) > 0 &&
	    ...)
	    ...

   This seems correct to me.

> ---
>  net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_sip.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_sip.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_sip.c
> index 77f5e82d8e3f..d0eac27f6ba0 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_sip.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_sip.c
> @@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ int ct_sip_parse_numerical_param(const struct nf_conn *ct, const char *dptr,
>  	start += strlen(name);
>  	*val = simple_strtoul(start, &end, 0);
>  	if (start == end)
> -		return 0;
> +		return -1;
>  	if (matchoff && matchlen) {
>  		*matchoff = start - dptr;
>  		*matchlen = end - start;
> -- 
> 2.30.2
>