oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too
From: Sebastian Krahmer <krahmer () suse com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 09:49:56 +0100
Hi On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:58:11PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:58:47PM -0500, cve-assign () mitre org wrote:MITRE will assign CVE IDs. Do the above references mean that most of the changed code lines in dhcp.c.patch correspond to out-of-bounds reads shown in the http://roy.marples.name/projects/dhcpcd/fdiff?sbs=1&v1=63689c50411b0920&v2=dad877391ea5b128 diff,I had expected this part of the diff to address the out-of-bounds writes: if (out && out != start) *(out - 1) = ' ';
Ack, looks like heap[-1] OOB write to me.
the change from "(l = *q++)" to "(l = *q++) && q - p < len" corresponds to an out-of-bounds write,I must confess that I skimmed the protected code block quickly when coming to the conclusion that this was out-of-bounds reads -- it's intricate and involved and the q - p < len check looked correct. But the memcpy(out,...) call does look like it'd also perform out-of-bounds writes.
Recalling from my last analyse, I think this is just an OOB read, because decode_search() is called with out being NULL to count the amount of data to be copied later. Unless this data is somehow modified the next call to decode_search() should have sufficient amount of heap allocated for the memcpy() to be correct. But the loop has an OOB read when counting the data (and later when copying it and there wasnt already a SIGSEGV).
the deletion of "free (dhcp->dnssearch)" corresponds to a use-after-free, and nothing else in the 2012 part of the http://roy.marples.name reference is a new vulnerability? (This is just a guess.)I should point out that it's my summary that it's a use-after-free -- Guido said in his report that it is a double-free.
I think that both classes are basically the same. After all, maybe quite challenging to exploit for one-packet client side. Sebastian -- ~ perl self.pl ~ $_='print"\$_=\47$_\47;eval"';eval ~ krahmer () suse com - SuSE Security Team
Current thread:
- CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too Seth Arnold (Dec 01)
- Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too cve-assign (Dec 01)
- Re: Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too Seth Arnold (Dec 01)
- Re: Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too Sebastian Krahmer (Dec 02)
- Re: Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too Seth Arnold (Dec 01)
- Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too cve-assign (Dec 02)
- Re: CVE Request: dhcpcd 3.x, potentially other versions too cve-assign (Dec 01)