Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <hidden>
Date: 2006-08-20 10:49:03
Also in:
lkml
Hello. In article [ref] (at Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:15:28 +0200), Willy Tarreau [off-list ref] says:
But I don't want to induce such large changes in this kernel. The goal of
this test is a preventive measure to catch easily exploitable errors that
might have remained undetected. For instance, a quick glance shows this
portion of code in net/ipv4/raw.c (both 2.4 and 2.6) :
static int raw_seticmpfilter(struct sock *sk, char *optval, int optlen)
{
if (optlen > sizeof(struct icmp_filter))
optlen = sizeof(struct icmp_filter);
if (copy_from_user(&sk->tp_pinfo.tp_raw4.filter, optval, optlen))
return -EFAULT;
return 0;
}
It only relies on sock_setsockopt() refusing optlen values < sizeof(int),
and this is not documented. Having part of this code being copied for use
in another code path would open a breach for optlen < 0.:
There are two tests in this patch :
- one on the validity of the optlen address. This one is race-free and
should be conserved anyway.
- one on the optlen range which is valid for most cases but which is
subject to a race condition and which might be circumvented by
carefully written code and with some luck as in all race conditions
issues.Don't mix getsockopt() and setsockopt() code paths. For setsockopt(), optlen < 0 is checked in net/socket.c:sys_setsockopt(). For getsockopt(), optlen and *optlen < 0 is (and should be) checked (or handled) in each getsockopt function; e.g. do_ip_getsockopt(), raw_geticmpfilter() etc. --yoshfuji