Re: Question about CVE-2022-43945

[yangerkun <yangerkun@huawei.com>]

On 2022/11/12 13:01, yangerkun wrote:
> Hi, Chuck Lever,
> 
> CVE-2022-43945(https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-43945) describe 
> that a normal request header ended with garbage data can trigger the 
> nfsd overflow since nfsd share the request and response with the same 
> pages array.
> 
> It seems that the 
> patchset(https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/166204973526.1435.6068003336048840051.stgit@manet.1015granger.net/T/#t) 
> has solved NFSv2/NFSv3, but leave NFSv4 still vulnerably?
> 
> Another question, for stable branch like lts-5.10, since NFSv2/NFSv3 did 
> not switch to xdr_stream, the nfs_request_too_big in nfsd_dispatch will 
> reject the request like READ/READDIR with too large request. So it seems 
> branch without that "switch" seems ok for NFSv2/NFSv3, but NFSv3 still 
> vulnerably. right?
> 
> Looking forward to your reply!

Sorry, notice that 76ce4dcec0dc"NFSD: Cap rsize_bop result based on send 
buffer size") fix same problem for NFSv4.

So, for the stable branch like lts-5.10 which NFSv2/NFSv3 do not switch 
to xdr_stream, it seems we only need 76ce4dcec0dc"NFSD: Cap rsize_bop 
result based on send buffer size"). Right?

> 
> Thanks,
> Erkun Yang
> .