oss-security - Re: CVE Request: kernel: ethtool: kernel buffer overflow in ETHTOOL

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1256028889.1643241277925802550.JavaMail.root@zmail01.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:23:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Josh Bressers <bressers@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: akuster <akuster@...sta.com>, "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: CVE Request: kernel: ethtool: kernel buffer
 overflow in ETHTOOL_GRXCLSRLALL

Please use CVE-2010-2478

Thanks.

-- 
    JB


----- "Eugene Teo" <eugeneteo@...nel.sg> wrote:

> On 06/29/2010 11:53 PM, akuster wrote:
> > Eugene,
> >
> > Thanks for the info. Unfortunately it does affect a few MontaVista
> > kernels. Is it possible to get a CVE for this?
> 
> I edited the $SUBJECT :)
> 
> Eugene
> 
> > On 06/28/2010 04:10 PM, Eugene Teo wrote:
> >> FYI, "On a 32-bit machine, info.rule_cnt>= 0x40000000 leads to
> integer
> >> overflow and the buffer may be smaller than needed.  Since
> >> ETHTOOL_GRXCLSRLALL is unprivileged, this can presumably be used
> for at
> >> least denial of service." This was introduced in v2.6.27-rc1 via
> >> upstream commit 0853ad66. Also see commit 59089d8d.
> >>
> >> Reference:
> >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/164869
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608950
> >>
> >> I'm not requesting a CVE name for this as it did not affect any of
> our
> >> Red Hat supported Linux kernels.
> >>
> >> Thanks, Eugene
> 
> 
> -- 
> main(i) { putchar(182623909 >> (i-1) * 5&31|!!(i<7)<<6) && main(++i);
> }

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.