netfilter: add back stackpointer size checks
commit 57ebd808a97d7c5b1e1afb937c2db22beba3c1f8 upstream. The rationale for removing the check is only correct for rulesets generated by ip(6)tables. In iptables, a jump can only occur to a user-defined chain, i.e. because we size the stack based on number of user-defined chains we cannot exceed stack size. However, the underlying binary format has no such restriction, and the validation step only ensures that the jump target is a valid rule start point. IOW, its possible to build a rule blob that has no user-defined chains but does contain a jump. If this happens, no jump stack gets allocated and crash occurs because no jumpstack was allocated. Fixes: 7814b6ec6d0d6 ("netfilter: xtables: don't save/restore jumpstack offset") Reported-by: syzbot+e783f671527912cd9403@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
44f3c2b6e5
commit
48db3004d4
@ -329,6 +329,10 @@ unsigned int arpt_do_table(struct sk_buff *skb,
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (table_base + v
|
||||
!= arpt_next_entry(e)) {
|
||||
if (unlikely(stackidx >= private->stacksize)) {
|
||||
verdict = NF_DROP;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
jumpstack[stackidx++] = e;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -408,6 +408,10 @@ ipt_do_table(struct sk_buff *skb,
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (table_base + v != ipt_next_entry(e) &&
|
||||
!(e->ip.flags & IPT_F_GOTO)) {
|
||||
if (unlikely(stackidx >= private->stacksize)) {
|
||||
verdict = NF_DROP;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
jumpstack[stackidx++] = e;
|
||||
pr_debug("Pushed %p into pos %u\n",
|
||||
e, stackidx - 1);
|
||||
|
@ -425,6 +425,10 @@ ip6t_do_table(struct sk_buff *skb,
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (table_base + v != ip6t_next_entry(e) &&
|
||||
!(e->ipv6.flags & IP6T_F_GOTO)) {
|
||||
if (unlikely(stackidx >= private->stacksize)) {
|
||||
verdict = NF_DROP;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
jumpstack[stackidx++] = e;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user