[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51D4EDE7.6030504@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 21:37:11 -0600
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
CC: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>, Michael Jerris <mike@...ris.com>,
Ken Rice <krice@...eswitch.org>
Subject: Re: CVE request: FreeSWITCH regex substitution 3 buffer
overflows
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/01/2013 02:46 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Yesterday I started thinking for the first time about some VOIP
> solution for our office, and come across FreeSWITCH software --
> www.freeswitch.org. After talking on IRC a bit, I decided to take
> a look at the source, because a question asked by one of the users
> looked interesting to me.
>
> And immediately I discovered 3 buffer overflows in the _first_
> function I ever saw in the source of this software.
>
> http://jira.freeswitch.org/browse/FS-5566 - it is the original
> bugreport which looked innocent enough initially.
>
> http://jira.freeswitch.org/secure/attachment/18855/0001-regex_subst-allow-n-in-regex-substitutions-and-fix-3.patch
> -- this is a patch of mine that fixes initial bug and also 3 buffer
> overflows I found when dealing with the issue.
>
> Some context. FreeSWITCH's routing mechanism is based almost
> entirely on regular expressions and uses substring matches in the
> core routing (dialplan). So the regexps are matched against
> untrusted input (which is especially mentioned in the docs). But
> ofcourse users aren't easy with writing regexps correctly, always
> constraining the length of the input properly.
>
> So, if there are any references to unconstrained input in any
> dialplan expressions -- that is, instead of \d{10}, \d+ is used,
> we're getting a remotely triggerable buffer overflows with good
> potential of remote code execution.
>
> As simple as that.
>
> It _looks_ like the default configuration isn't affected since
> apparently all regexes there are constrained. But we can't be sure
> for all user configs.
>
> I haven't studied actual potential for code execution, but from a
> quick view it appears quite possible.
>
> Thanks,
>
> /mjt
Same researcher/version/vuln type so CVE MERGE. Please use
CVE-2013-2238 for this issue.
- --
Kurt Seifried Red Hat Security Response Team (SRT)
PGP: 0x5E267993 A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR1O3mAAoJEBYNRVNeJnmTwA4QAMVxd81ar5PHUNo/NRf+giHU
EQhYZBvIQIysyFeOn3SAmeAcO4j0+t+t06Hmm23gR7YKHhj04PvHhCHCo+12WKt5
3susjMf9XfR0hlXoGK0Buzn9ICx7GzR8Gxq9omevNkacJHySdhHrUVbjpd/lLjtK
iR0IUG/+7w/5guznzT+NaKVPc1jkxjE+agH4gIO553V1ZgmN7U9S16/FylL8Z9PD
0uRyzztah/4pE4Ic/OMhwRUMX2B1s894oW0NxIqS4nhsp6Wwzqbp5+SDQLt18Vcc
EzrrnAd8JGWswqZylZTmgOGOG0uuXtkq+WIKqKDx4B6I+RdBipQ/+3GGWY+giaAT
P6vfSMU+VvzjJ6iYQRanRzJIiZQogfmRIhDXHjtOBR32/uZinZdSPm1GWMaBcRFq
ZLbUEjtIjN3zVffYF2lZtYspQ1iIy4OHddanpYBlcBNQSqgpW5ChNQB0/+JkwE3h
fOV/PEs+TAK7U/exVshWnF93Hr85B167q274ViWb+9/VOjfiUvHGcjbkYiVthv5P
xkBkj4PNkYssdncXlRCH43ImO0APAy3dDbOUozEgJ8iPU9hIDWb+3/J5uODY/tz+
Tmbk8Ni69hIe3F4uMk0B5HOapTAfbcOzp+Gz1CPfMhZ2xpEZJNnHgqJ7j4b7kGAr
0/y4JDV6gsCe7QAKaaID
=HSFr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
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.
