Bug 1964129 (CVE-2021-35939)

Summary:	CVE-2021-35939 rpm: checks for unsafe symlinks are not performed for intermediary directories
Product:	[Other] Security Response	Reporter:	msiddiqu
Component:	vulnerability	Assignee:	Nobody <nobody>
Status:	NEW ---	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	unspecified	CC:	caswilli, derrick.roach.ctr, ffesti, kaycoth, packaging-team-maint, pmatilai, sbueno, vmugicag, vmukhame
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Security
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	rpm 4.18.0	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:	It was found that the fix for CVE-2017-7500 and CVE-2017-7501 was incomplete: the check was only implemented for the parent directory of the file to be created. A local unprivileged user who owns another ancestor directory could potentially use this flaw to gain root privileges. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to data confidentiality and integrity as well as system availability.	Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		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:	1969334, 1969333, 1969335, 1969804, 1969805, 1969806, 1977848, 1978167, 1978169, 1978170, 1978171, 2003067, 2070455
Bug Blocks:	1964123, 1977374

Description msiddiqu 2021-05-24 19:00:44 UTC

In response to CVE-2017-7500 and CVE-2017-7501, it was decided that the policy of RPM is "Only follow directory symlinks owned by target directory owner or root." [1]. This check was only implemented for the parent directory of the file to be created. If an untrusted user owns another ancestor directory, the problem remains unfixed.

An actual exploit requires that a similar directory structure exists both at the location where RPM operates and for the files the attacker wants to get control over. Packages with such paths do exist in the real world, however. For example, in openSUSE both matomo and icinga2 ship a 'Pdo/Mysql.php' somewhere in the file system, with different ownership. A compromised 'matomo' user can create a symlink /srv/www/matomo/core/Tracker/Db ->
/usr/share/icingaweb2/library/vendor/Zend/Db/Adapter/ and on the next update of matomo, RPM would replace the 'Pdo/Mysql.php' of icinga2 and give ownership of it to the 'matomo' user.

A fix for this requires a messy ball of code using O_PATH to manually walk the whole directory structure and manually resolving symlinks, like in [1] and [2].

References: 

1: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/a5648b809457d120500b2acb18b31e2168a4817a/src/basic/fs-util.c#L716
2: https://build.suse.de/package/view_file/SUSE:Maintenance:13179/permissions.SUSE_SLE-15-SP1_Update/0007-chkstat-fix-privesc-CVE-2019-3690.patch?expand=1
3. https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157883

Comment 4 Mauro Matteo Cascella 2021-06-30 15:22:06 UTC

Created rpm tracking bugs for this issue:

Affects: fedora-all [bug 1977848]

Comment 9 Mauro Matteo Cascella 2021-07-07 16:24:29 UTC

This flaw, along with CVE-2021-35937 and CVE-2021-35938, belong to a set of complex issues that may allow an unprivileged user to trick RPM into modifying root-owned files during installation, due to race conditions and/or symlink attacks. These issues do not have a solution upstream. Fixing would require rather involved refactoring of RPM internals.

Note that in this context, unprivileged users are actually system accounts (like the pcpqa user mentioned in one of the SUSE bugs) that are usually more tightly controlled than ordinary users. In general, access to files and directories installed by RPMs requires high privileges. Regular users should not be allowed to manipulate RPM artifacts during installation. A local attacker would first need to compromise a system account in order to exploit these flaws, thus reducing the overall impact considerably.

Comment 13 Panu Matilainen 2022-05-13 07:35:37 UTC

This is considered fixed in RPM 4.18 (https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.18.0) which is currently in alpha stage of the release process, final version is expected in Q3.

Comment 14 Mauro Matteo Cascella 2022-11-28 11:42:50 UTC

Upstream PR & commit:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1919
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/96ec957e281220f8e137a2d5eb23b83a6377d556

Comment 17 errata-xmlrpc 2024-01-24 15:26:14 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.0 Extended Update Support

Via RHSA-2024:0435 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:0435

Comment 18 errata-xmlrpc 2024-01-24 16:30:44 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9

Via RHSA-2024:0463 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:0463

Comment 19 errata-xmlrpc 2024-01-24 16:40:10 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.2 Extended Update Support

Via RHSA-2024:0453 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:0453

Comment 20 errata-xmlrpc 2024-01-24 16:48:34 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Extended Update Support

Via RHSA-2024:0424 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:0424

Comment 21 errata-xmlrpc 2024-01-30 13:24:42 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Extended Update Support

Via RHSA-2024:0582 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:0582

Comment 22 errata-xmlrpc 2024-02-01 12:29:35 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8

Via RHSA-2024:0647 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:0647