Bug 616998 (CVE-2010-2537, CVE-2010-2538)

Summary:	CVE-2010-2537 CVE-2010-2538 kernel: btrfs: fix checks in BTRFS_IOC_CLONE_RANGE
Product:	[Other] Security Response	Reporter:	Petr Matousek <pmatouse>
Component:	vulnerability	Assignee:	Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	unspecified	CC:	arozansk, eteo, peterm, pmatouse
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Security
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-10-19 09:04:21 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:	617003
Bug Blocks:

Description Petr Matousek 2010-07-21 21:25:19 UTC

Description of problem:
1. CVE-2010-2537 - The BTRFS_IOC_CLONE and BTRFS_IOC_CLONE_RANGE ioctls should check whether the donor file is append-only before writing to it.

2. CVE-2010-2538 - The BTRFS_IOC_CLONE_RANGE ioctl appears to have an integer
overflow that allows a user to specify an out-of-bounds range to copy from the source file (if off + len wraps around).

Upstream commit:
http://git.kernel.org/linus/2ebc3464781ad24474abcbd2274e6254689853b5

Reference:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page

The kernel in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 has support for Btrfs by default.

Comment 1 Petr Matousek 2010-07-21 21:25:46 UTC

Statement:

Not vulnerable. This issue did not affect the versions of Linux kernel as shipped with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, 4, 5 and Red Hat Enterprise MRG as they did not include support for Btrfs, a new copy on write filesystem.

Comment 3 Eugene Teo (Security Response) 2010-08-02 03:50:04 UTC

Acknowledgements:

Red Hat would like to thank Dan Rosenberg for responsibly reporting this issue.

Comment 4 Eugene Teo (Security Response) 2010-08-02 03:57:52 UTC

*** Bug 616992 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 Chuck Ebbert 2010-08-02 21:14:24 UTC

Fixed upstream in 2.6.35, 2.6.34.2, 2.6.33.7 and 2.6.32.17