From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: steffen.klassert@secunet.com
Cc: 3ntr0py1337@gmail.com, daniel@iogearbox.net,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Subject: [PATCH ipsec] xfrm: refine validation of template and selector families
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 14:37:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190109133734.6482-1-fw@strlen.de> (raw)
The check assumes that in transport mode, the first templates family
must match the address family of the policy selector.
Syzkaller managed to build a template using MODE_ROUTEOPTIMIZATION,
with ipv4-in-ipv6 chain, leading to following splat:
BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in xfrm_state_find+0x1db/0x1854
Read of size 4 at addr ffff888063e57aa0 by task a.out/2050
xfrm_state_find+0x1db/0x1854
xfrm_tmpl_resolve+0x100/0x1d0
xfrm_resolve_and_create_bundle+0x108/0x1000 [..]
Problem is that addresses point into flowi4 struct, but xfrm_state_find
treats them as being ipv6 because it uses templ->encap_family is used
(AF_INET6 in case of reproducer) rather than family (AF_INET).
This patch inverts the logic: Enforce 'template family must match
selector' EXCEPT for tunnel and BEET mode.
In BEET and Tunnel mode, xfrm_tmpl_resolve_one will have remote/local
address pointers changed to point at the addresses found in the template,
rather than the flowi ones, so no oob read will occur.
Reported-by: 3ntr0py1337@gmail.com
Reported-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
---
net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c | 13 +++++++++----
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
index 277c1c46fe94..c6d26afcf89d 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
@@ -1488,10 +1488,15 @@ static int validate_tmpl(int nr, struct xfrm_user_tmpl *ut, u16 family)
if (!ut[i].family)
ut[i].family = family;
- if ((ut[i].mode == XFRM_MODE_TRANSPORT) &&
- (ut[i].family != prev_family))
- return -EINVAL;
-
+ switch (ut[i].mode) {
+ case XFRM_MODE_TUNNEL:
+ case XFRM_MODE_BEET:
+ break;
+ default:
+ if (ut[i].family != prev_family)
+ return -EINVAL;
+ break;
+ }
if (ut[i].mode >= XFRM_MODE_MAX)
return -EINVAL;
--
2.19.2
next reply other threads:[~2019-01-09 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-09 13:37 Florian Westphal [this message]
2019-01-11 8:41 ` [PATCH ipsec] xfrm: refine validation of template and selector families Steffen Klassert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190109133734.6482-1-fw@strlen.de \
--to=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=3ntr0py1337@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).