Bug 648624 (CVE-2010-3859) - VUL-0: CVE-2010-3859: kernel: heap overflow in TIPC
Summary: VUL-0: CVE-2010-3859: kernel: heap overflow in TIPC
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: CVE-2010-3859
Product: SUSE Security Incidents
Classification: Novell Products
Component: General (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other Other
: P5 - None : Normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: E-mail List
QA Contact: Security Team bot
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-10-22 13:47 UTC by Ludwig Nussel
Modified: 2017-03-20 21:25 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Found By: Other
Services Priority:
Business Priority:
Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: ---
IT Deployment: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Ludwig Nussel 2010-10-22 13:47:45 UTC
Your friendly security team received the following report via oss-security.
Please respond ASAP.
The issue is public.

AFAICS we don't have CONFIG_TIPC set

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:11:18 -0400
From: Dan Rosenberg <dan.j.rosenberg@gmail.com>
Subject: [oss-security] CVE request: kernel: heap overflow in TIPC

The tipc_msg_build() function in net/tipc/msg.c contains an
exploitable kernel heap overflow that would allow a local user to
escalate privileges to root by issuing maliciously crafted sendmsg()
calls via TIPC sockets.

Fortunately, none of the distributions I tested actually define a
module alias for TIPC even though it is compiled as a module on nearly
all of them (I suspect this is a lucky accident).  Since in these
situations, the TIPC module will not be loaded automatically on
creation of a TIPC socket, an administrator would have had to
explicitly load the TIPC kernel module in order for a system to be
vulnerable.

I checked Ubuntu, Debian, and Fedora, none of which define an alias.
Any distributions that define a module alias for TIPC (i.e. "alias
net-pf-30 tipc") should treat this as a serious vulnerability.  Even
if your distribution does not, I highly recommend backporting the fix
for this, since it's a bit of defensive programming in the core
networking code that handles verifying user-supplied iovecs, which
likely resolves other undiscovered (or undisclosed) security issues
elsewhere.  I'll post a link to the fix when it's finalized and
committed.

Reference:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=128770476511716&w=2

-Dan
Comment 1 Ludwig Nussel 2010-10-22 14:40:06 UTC
CVE-2010-3859