CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

Description
===========

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

If priv->len is a multiple of 4, then dst[len / 4] can write past
the destination array which leads to stack corruption.

This construct is necessary to clean the remainder of the register
in case ->len is NOT a multiple of the register size, so make it
conditional just like nft_payload.c does.

The bug was added in 4.1 cycle and then copied/inherited when
tcp/sctp and ip option support was added.

Bug reported by Zero Day Initiative project (ZDI-CAN-21950,
ZDI-CAN-21951, ZDI-CAN-21961).

The Linux kernel CVE team has assigned CVE-2023-52628 to this issue.


Affected and fixed versions
===========================

	Issue introduced in 4.1 with commit dbb5281a1f84 and fixed in 5.10.198 with commit a7d86a77c33b
	Issue introduced in 4.1 with commit dbb5281a1f84 and fixed in 5.15.132 with commit 1ad7b189cc14
	Issue introduced in 4.1 with commit dbb5281a1f84 and fixed in 6.1.54 with commit d9ebfc0f2137
	Issue introduced in 4.1 with commit dbb5281a1f84 and fixed in 6.5.4 with commit c8f292322ff1
	Issue introduced in 4.1 with commit dbb5281a1f84 and fixed in 6.6 with commit fd94d9dadee5

Please see https://www.kernel.org for a full list of currently supported
kernel versions by the kernel community.

Unaffected versions might change over time as fixes are backported to
older supported kernel versions.  The official CVE entry at
	https://cve.org/CVERecord/?id=CVE-2023-52628
will be updated if fixes are backported, please check that for the most
up to date information about this issue.


Affected files
==============

The file(s) affected by this issue are:
	net/netfilter/nft_exthdr.c


Mitigation
==========

The Linux kernel CVE team recommends that you update to the latest
stable kernel version for this, and many other bugfixes.  Individual
changes are never tested alone, but rather are part of a larger kernel
release.  Cherry-picking individual commits is not recommended or
supported by the Linux kernel community at all.  If however, updating to
the latest release is impossible, the individual changes to resolve this
issue can be found at these commits:
	https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a7d86a77c33ba1c357a7504341172cc1507f0698
	https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1ad7b189cc1411048434e8595ffcbe7873b71082
	https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d9ebfc0f21377690837ebbd119e679243e0099cc
	https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c8f292322ff16b9a2272a67de396c09a50e09dce
	https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fd94d9dadee58e09b49075240fe83423eb1dcd36

Re: CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

[Siddh Raman Pant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 302 bytes --]

Is this a duplicate of CVE-2023-4881? It was rejected with the reason:

> https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2023-4881
>
> ** REJECT ** CVE-2023-4881 was wrongly assigned to a bug that was
> deemed to be a non-security issue by the Linux kernel security team.

Thanks,
Siddh


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

[gregkh]

On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 03:48:29AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> Is this a duplicate of CVE-2023-4881? It was rejected with the reason:
> 
> > https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2023-4881
> >
> > ** REJECT ** CVE-2023-4881 was wrongly assigned to a bug that was
> > deemed to be a non-security issue by the Linux kernel security team.

I don't know, where is the information about that older rejected issue?
If this isn't an issue, we will be glad to reject it.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [External] : Re: CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

[Siddh Raman Pant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 871 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 09 2024 at 10:49:59 +0530, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 03:48:29AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> > Is this a duplicate of CVE-2023-4881? It was rejected with the reason:
> > 
> > > https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2023-4881
> > > 
> > > ** REJECT ** CVE-2023-4881 was wrongly assigned to a bug that was
> > > deemed to be a non-security issue by the Linux kernel security team.
> 
> I don't know, where is the information about that older rejected issue?
> If this isn't an issue, we will be glad to reject it.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-4881 (see analysis
description where it just describes the issue).

Or just https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238312

I'm unable to find a rejection reason though, maybe that's on a private
mailing list.

Thanks,
Siddh

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [External] : Re: CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

[gregkh]

On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 05:27:15AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 09 2024 at 10:49:59 +0530, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 03:48:29AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> > > Is this a duplicate of CVE-2023-4881? It was rejected with the reason:
> > > 
> > > > https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2023-4881
> > > > 
> > > > ** REJECT ** CVE-2023-4881 was wrongly assigned to a bug that was
> > > > deemed to be a non-security issue by the Linux kernel security team.
> > 
> > I don't know, where is the information about that older rejected issue?
> > If this isn't an issue, we will be glad to reject it.
> 
> https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-4881 (see analysis
> description where it just describes the issue).
> 
> Or just https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238312
> 
> I'm unable to find a rejection reason though, maybe that's on a private
> mailing list.

Looks like Red Hat created it and then rejected it, you will have to
talk about this with them.  But then later ZDI asked me to assign a CVE
for it, and I did assuming that they knew what they were talking about.
I shouldn't have assumed that :(

I don't know what to do here, sorry.  If you don't think this is an
issue, great, I'll be glad to reject it but we should say at least why
we don't think so here in this thread, right?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [External] : Re: CVE-2023-52628: netfilter: nftables: exthdr: fix 4-byte stack OOB write

[Siddh Raman Pant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 758 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 09 2024 at 15:39:43 +0530, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> Looks like Red Hat created it and then rejected it, you will have to
> talk about this with them.  But then later ZDI asked me to assign a CVE
> for it, and I did assuming that they knew what they were talking about.
> I shouldn't have assumed that :(
> 
> I don't know what to do here, sorry.  If you don't think this is an
> issue, great, I'll be glad to reject it but we should say at least why
> we don't think so here in this thread, right?

Thank you for the clarification!

I thought the "Linux kernel security team" is referring to an upstream
group, so I asked about it because it seemed off.

Anyways, best to have this up instead of not.

Thanks,
Siddh

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]