[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADk+mPC1BwyYo-_r=SfjcBWZXnnuhwN_vNsZrW-Z6YmYoXG74w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 13:53:02 +0200
From: Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards@...adiscon.com>
To: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
Cc: Martin Schulze <joey@...odrom.org>, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: sysklogd vulnerability (CVE-2014-3634)
Sent from phone, thus brief.
Am 03.10.2014 13:26 schrieb "Solar Designer" <solar@...nwall.com>:
>
> On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 11:24:43AM +0000, mancha wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 09:12:28AM +0000, mancha wrote:
> > > In sysklogd's syslogd, invalid priority values between 192 and 1023
> > > (directly or arrived at via overflow wraparound) can propagate through
> > > code causing out-of-bounds access to the f_pmask array within the
> > > 'filed' structure by up to 104 bytes past its end. Though most likely
> > > insufficient to reach unallocated memory because there are around 544
> > > bytes past f_pmask in 'filed' (mod packing and other differences),
> > > incorrect access of fields at higher positions of the 'filed'
> > > structure definition can cause unexpected behavior including message
> > > mis-classification, forwarding issues, message loss, or other.
> >
> > To expand on the above, because the out-of-bounds access is limited to
> > the filed structure, the effect on message handling, etc. appears
> > limited to the would-be attacker's own message. Unlike the more serious
> > impact seen in rsyslog, my limited testing and code review suggests the
> > flaw, while there, has no real security impact. Nevertheless, my patch
> > fixes the handling of malformed PRI parts.
>
> What about the DoS impact claimed here, though? -
>
> http://www.rsyslog.com/remote-syslog-pri-vulnerability-cve-2014-3683/
>
> sysklogd
> ~~~~~~~~
> A segfault seems possible in sysklogd if a negative facility value (due
to
> integer overrun in facility parsing) is used. This could be used to
> carry out a remote DoS.
>
> If this can be used to crash syslogd, it's "real security impact", even
> if rather limited.
>
> Have you tried triggering this condition (getting syslogd to crash)?
I didn't try out sysklogd as I was busy enough with rsyslog BUT I can crash
unpatched rsyslog v3 and the code path in question is extremely similar in
those two.
Note that a carefully crafted overflow pri may lead to a 2gb misadressing
below f_pmask, which most probably is outside of the address space. I
haven't checked, though, if i can craft such a pri. But you have around
1000 digits for trying, so I think its possible.
Mancha may have more concrete information.
Rainer
>
> Alexander
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.
