From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46221)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1X1W6K-0000tK-5O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 03:34:14 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1X1W6E-0006zY-0T
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 03:34:08 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:26344)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1X1W6D-0006zC-O8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 03:34:01 -0400
Message-ID: <1404113633.17465.3.camel@nilsson.home.kraxel.org>
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:33:53 +0200
In-Reply-To: <53B003B2.2020309@kamp.de>
References: <53B003B2.2020309@kamp.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] possible denial of service via VNC
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>
Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On So, 2014-06-29 at 14:16 +0200, Peter Lieven wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> while debugging a VNC issue I found this:
> 
>     case VNC_MSG_CLIENT_CUT_TEXT:
>         if (len == 1)
>             return 8;
> 
>         if (len == 8) {
>             uint32_t dlen = read_u32(data, 4);
>             if (dlen > 0)
>                 return 8 + dlen;
>         }
> 
>         client_cut_text(vs, read_u32(data, 4), data + 8);
>         break;
> 
> in protocol_client_msg().
> 
> Is this really a good idea? This allows for letting the vs->input buffer to grow
> up to 2^32 + 8 byte which will possibly result in an out of memory condition.

Applying a limit there looks reasonable to me.  Patches welcome.
As this is text only a megabyte should be more than enough for all
practical purposes.  Question is what to do when the limit is exceeded?
Disconnect?  Read & throw away?

cheers,
  Gerd