Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1530773
| From | Eric Dumazet <erdlkml@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: net: GPF in eth_header |
| Date | 2016-11-26 21:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sHRsl-2MG-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sHP7b-189-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <sHPTz-1JW-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sHQwi-2dp-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
> Hi Eric, > > The crash happens when the kernel tries to access shadow for nonmapped memory. > > The issue here is an integer overflow which happens in neigh_resolve_output(). > skb_network_offset(skb) can return negative number, but __skb_pull() > accepts unsigned int as len. > As a result, the least significat bit in higher 32 bits of skb->data > gets set and we get an out-of-bounds with offset of 4 GB. > > I've attached a short reproducer, but you either need KASAN or to add > a BUG_ON to see the crash. > In this reproducer skb_network_offset() becomes negative after merging > two ipv6 fragments. > > I actually see multiple places where skb_network_offset() is used as > an argument to skb_pull(). > So I guess every place can potentially be buggy. Well, I think the intent is to accept a negative number. This definitely was assumed by commit e1f165032c8bade authors ! I guess they were using a 32bit kernel for their tests.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
net: GPF in eth_header Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2016-11-26 18:40 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> - 2016-11-26 19:30 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> - 2016-11-26 20:10 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <erdlkml@gmail.com> - 2016-11-26 21:10 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <erdlkml@gmail.com> - 2016-11-26 21:40 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> - 2016-11-29 11:30 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 16:00 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> - 2016-11-29 16:40 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 17:20 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 20:00 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> - 2016-11-28 20:10 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2016-11-28 20:40 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 20:50 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 22:10 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 22:20 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> - 2016-11-28 22:40 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 23:20 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> - 2016-11-28 23:30 +0100
Re: net: GPF in eth_header Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 00:20 +0100
csiph-web