Bug 142802

Summary:	CVE-2005-0176 unlock someone elses ipc memory
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3	Reporter:	Mark J. Cox <mjc>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Dave Anderson <anderson>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Brian Brock <bbrock>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	3.0	CC:	bressers, jparadis, lwoodman, peterm, petrides, riel, sct
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Security
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:	public=20041124,impact=moderate
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-05-25 16:42:36 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	156320

Description Mark J. Cox 2004-12-14 15:34:34 UTC

Reported on lkml a flaw that allows you to unlock someone
elses ipc memory (hence crossing permission boundary).

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=110132782610477
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=110137276318105

"In 2.6.8, the only processes that could lock shared memory segments
were those with CAP_IPC_LOCK.  Unprivileged processes did not get a
look in."

Looks like this is 2.6.9 (Arjan says since the fixed rhel3 mlock stuff
got merged it might be there too)

Comment 2 Ernie Petrides 2005-04-21 03:20:27 UTC

A fix for this problem has just been committed to the RHEL3 U6
patch pool this evening (in kernel version 2.4.21-32.1.EL).

Comment 5 Ernie Petrides 2005-05-17 22:11:33 UTC

A fix for this problem has also been committed to the RHEL3 E6
patch pool this evening (in kernel version 2.4.21-32.0.1.EL).

Comment 6 Josh Bressers 2005-05-25 16:42:36 UTC

An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-472.html