CVE-2012-6536 (published 2013-03-15T20:55Z)

net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c in the Linux kernel before 3.6 does not verify that the actual Netlink message length is consistent with a certain header field, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information from kernel heap memory by leveraging the CAP_NET_ADMIN capability and providing a (1) new or (2) updated state.

Severity: LOW
CVSS v2 base score: 2.1 (AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N)

Weakness information:
cwe_id: CWE-200
cwe_name: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
description: The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
extended_description: 
	   There are many different kinds of mistakes that introduce information exposures. The severity of the error can range widely, depending on the context in which the product operates, the type of sensitive information that is revealed, and the benefits it may provide to an attacker.  Some kinds of sensitive information include:
       
         private, personal information, such as personal messages, financial data, health records, geographic location, or contact details
         system status and environment, such as the operating system and installed packages
		 business secrets and intellectual property
		 network status and configuration
		 the product's own code or internal state
         metadata, e.g. logging of connections or message headers
		 indirect information, such as a discrepancy between two internal operations that can be observed by an outsider
       
	    Information might be sensitive to different parties, each of which may have their own expectations for whether the information should be protected.  These parties include:
               
                  the product's own users
                  people or organizations whose information is created or used by the product, even if they are not direct product users
		  the product's administrators, including the admins of the system(s) and/or networks on which the product operates
                  the developer
               
	    Information exposures can occur in different ways:
               
                  the code explicitly inserts sensitive information into resources or messages that are intentionally made accessible to unauthorized actors, but should not contain the information - i.e., the information should have been "scrubbed" or "sanitized"
                  a different weakness or mistake indirectly inserts the sensitive information into resources, such as a web script error revealing the full system path of the program.
                  the code manages resources that intentionally contain sensitive information, but the resources are unintentionally made accessible to unauthorized actors. In this case, the information exposure is resultant - i.e., a different weakness enabled the access to the information in the first place.
               
	    It is common practice to describe any loss of confidentiality as an "information exposure," but this can lead to overuse of CWE-200 in CWE mapping. From the CWE perspective, loss of confidentiality is a technical impact that can arise from dozens of different weaknesses, such as insecure file permissions or out-of-bounds read.  CWE-200 and its lower-level descendants are intended to cover the mistakes that occur in behaviors that explicitly manage, store, transfer, or cleanse sensitive information.
         
         

Fix information:
repo_url: https://github.com/torvalds/linux
commit_details: repo_url: https://github.com/torvalds/linux
author: Mathias Krause
author_date: 2012-09-20 10:01:49+00:00
msg: xfrm_user: ensure user supplied esn replay window is valid

The current code fails to ensure that the netlink message actually
contains as many bytes as the header indicates. If a user creates a new
state or updates an existing one but does not supply the bytes for the
whole ESN replay window, the kernel copies random heap bytes into the
replay bitmap, the ones happen to follow the XFRMA_REPLAY_ESN_VAL
netlink attribute. This leads to following issues:

1. The replay window has random bits set confusing the replay handling
   code later on.

2. A malicious user could use this flaw to leak up to ~3.5kB of heap
   memory when she has access to the XFRM netlink interface (requires
   CAP_NET_ADMIN).

Known users of the ESN replay window are strongSwan and Steffen's
iproute2 patch (<http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/85962/>). The latter
uses the interface with a bitmap supplied while the former does not.
strongSwan is therefore prone to run into issue 1.

To fix both issues without breaking existing userland allow using the
XFRMA_REPLAY_ESN_VAL netlink attribute with either an empty bitmap or a
fully specified one. For the former case we initialize the in-kernel
bitmap with zero, for the latter we copy the user supplied bitmap. For
state updates the full bitmap must be supplied.

To prevent overflows in the bitmap length calculation the maximum size
of bmp_len is limited to 128 by this patch -- resulting in a maximum
replay window of 4096 packets. This should be sufficient for all real
life scenarios (RFC 4303 recommends a default replay window size of 64).

Cc: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: Martin Willi <martin@revosec.ch>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
repository: repo_url: https://github.com/torvalds/linux
repo_name: torvalds/linux
description: Linux kernel source tree
repo_language: C
owner: torvalds
file_changes: filename: xfrm.h
change_type: ModificationType.MODIFY
diff: @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ struct xfrm_replay_state {
 	__u32	bitmap;
 };
 
+#define XFRMA_REPLAY_ESN_MAX	4096
+
 struct xfrm_replay_state_esn {
 	unsigned int	bmp_len;
 	__u32		oseq;

programming_language: C
filename: xfrm_user.c
change_type: ModificationType.MODIFY
diff: @@ -123,9 +123,21 @@ static inline int verify_replay(struct xfrm_usersa_info *p,
 				struct nlattr **attrs)
 {
 	struct nlattr *rt = attrs[XFRMA_REPLAY_ESN_VAL];
+	struct xfrm_replay_state_esn *rs;
 
-	if ((p->flags & XFRM_STATE_ESN) && !rt)
-		return -EINVAL;
+	if (p->flags & XFRM_STATE_ESN) {
+		if (!rt)
+			return -EINVAL;
+
+		rs = nla_data(rt);
+
+		if (rs->bmp_len > XFRMA_REPLAY_ESN_MAX / sizeof(rs->bmp[0]) / 8)
+			return -EINVAL;
+
+		if (nla_len(rt) < xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(rs) &&
+		    nla_len(rt) != sizeof(*rs))
+			return -EINVAL;
+	}
 
 	if (!rt)
 		return 0;
@@ -370,14 +382,15 @@ static inline int xfrm_replay_verify_len(struct xfrm_replay_state_esn *replay_es
 					 struct nlattr *rp)
 {
 	struct xfrm_replay_state_esn *up;
+	int ulen;
 
 	if (!replay_esn || !rp)
 		return 0;
 
 	up = nla_data(rp);
+	ulen = xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(up);
 
-	if (xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(replay_esn) !=
-			xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(up))
+	if (nla_len(rp) < ulen || xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(replay_esn) != ulen)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	return 0;
@@ -388,22 +401,28 @@ static int xfrm_alloc_replay_state_esn(struct xfrm_replay_state_esn **replay_esn
 				       struct nlattr *rta)
 {
 	struct xfrm_replay_state_esn *p, *pp, *up;
+	int klen, ulen;
 
 	if (!rta)
 		return 0;
 
 	up = nla_data(rta);
+	klen = xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(up);
+	ulen = nla_len(rta) >= klen ? klen : sizeof(*up);
 
-	p = kmemdup(up, xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(up), GFP_KERNEL);
+	p = kzalloc(klen, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!p)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
-	pp = kmemdup(up, xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(up), GFP_KERNEL);
+	pp = kzalloc(klen, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!pp) {
 		kfree(p);
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	}
 
+	memcpy(p, up, ulen);
+	memcpy(pp, up, ulen);
+
 	*replay_esn = p;
 	*preplay_esn = pp;
 

programming_language: C