Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||CVE-2012-4527 mcrypt: stack-based buffer overflow by encryption / decryption of overly long file names|
|Product:||[Other] Security Response||Reporter:||Attila Bogar <attila.bogar>|
|Component:||vulnerability||Assignee:||Red Hat Product Security <security-response-team>|
|Status:||CLOSED ERRATA||QA Contact:|
|Version:||unspecified||CC:||attila.bogar, contact_redhat, iwamatsu, jlieskov, jrusnack, tcallawa|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2013-05-09 17:01:37 EDT||Type:||Bug|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:||867879, 867881|
Description Attila Bogar 2012-10-18 06:00:02 EDT
Created attachment 629285 [details] patch to fix the buffer overflow Description of problem: A buffer overflow in mcrypt version 2.6.8 and earlier due to long filenames. If a user were tricked into attempting to encrypt/decrypt specially crafted long filename(s), this flaw would cause a stack-based buffer overflow that could potentially lead to arbitrary code execution. Note that this is caught by FORTIFY_SOURCE, which renders this to being a crash-only bug on Fedora. There are currently no upstream patches for this flaw. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): mcrypt-2.6.8-9.el6 (possibly others too). How reproducible: Run mcrypt with ~128 byte long file names.
Comment 1 Attila Bogar 2012-10-18 06:01:26 EDT
Created attachment 629286 [details] new spec spec file to build fixed rpms
Comment 2 Jan Lieskovsky 2012-10-18 09:24:43 EDT
Thank you for your report, Attila. I can confirm the issue (looks to be yet something different than CVE-2012-4409): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855029 I am going to steal this bug to be security response product one.
Comment 3 Jan Lieskovsky 2012-10-18 09:37:15 EDT
This issue affects the versions of the mcrypt package, as shipped with Fedora release of 16 and 17. Please schedule an update. -- This issue affects the versions of the mcrypt package, as shipped with Fedora EPEL 5 and Fedora EPEL 6. Please schedule an update.
Comment 4 Jan Lieskovsky 2012-10-18 09:38:21 EDT
Created mcrypt tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 867879] Affects: epel-all [bug 867881]
Comment 5 Jan Lieskovsky 2012-10-18 09:53:58 EDT
Comment 6 Attila Bogar 2012-10-18 10:06:20 EDT
My fix is actually a workaround. For a proper fix the buffer (tmperr) length should be calculated and malloced before the snprintf is actually called.
Comment 7 Vincent Danen 2012-10-18 16:45:22 EDT
This received CVE-2012-4527: http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/10/18/12
Comment 8 Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-10-19 14:40:33 EDT
Is there any reason not to apply the workaround patch? I believe that mcrypt is unmaintained at this point in time.
Comment 9 Attila Bogar 2012-10-19 14:55:00 EDT
(In reply to comment #8) > Is there any reason not to apply the workaround patch? I believe that mcrypt > is unmaintained at this point in time. Yes there is. Someone with more expertise in fixing buffer overflows should come up with a proper patch. My patch works for me with WIDTH defined 80. I accidentally submitted the wrong version with WIDTH 132.
Comment 10 Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-10-22 09:18:20 EDT
Well, then I'll just wait for that proper patch.
Comment 11 Nobuhiro Iwamatsu 2012-10-29 18:23:29 EDT
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Is there any reason not to apply the workaround patch? I believe that mcrypt > > is unmaintained at this point in time. > > Yes there is. Someone with more expertise in fixing buffer overflows should > come up with a proper patch. > > My patch works for me with WIDTH defined 80. I accidentally submitted the > wrong version with WIDTH 132. I created the patch which changed WITH into 80. Is it OK?
Comment 12 Nobuhiro Iwamatsu 2012-10-29 18:23:58 EDT
Created attachment 635243 [details] 80-width patch
Comment 13 contact_redhat 2012-11-02 14:14:14 EDT
I think it would be better either to replace #define WIDTH 80 by #define WIDTH (sizeof(tmperr)) or #define WIDTH 80 char tmperr; by #define WIDTH 128 char tmperr[WIDTH]; snprintf does add a \0 at tmperr[WIDTH-1] on overflow Attached is a proposal to increase the error buffer to PATH_MAX + 1k The buffer is static, used only in printf. Memory impact should be acceptable. And this allow to show the end of the error message if a file were to contain a very long name. I believe a proper fix should be changing all the err_crit like functions to use va_args. But I suppose it is beyond scope.
Comment 14 contact_redhat 2012-11-02 14:16:43 EDT
Created attachment 637190 [details] PATH_MAX+1k buffer. Do use buf length in snprintf calls
Comment 15 Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-11-02 14:45:25 EDT
I honestly don't care. I think you need to be proposing this to upstream mcrypt at this point, since the 80 char workaround is sufficient to prevent the overflow.
Comment 16 contact_redhat 2012-11-03 20:25:43 EDT
Just my two cents: Forget about increasing the buffer size, if you like, ok. But is weird to have a 128 bytes buffer and use only the 80 firsts bytes. WIDTH should be 128 to match tmperr buffer. #define WIDTH 128 char tmperr[WIDTH]; is a better patch, in the sense that it keeps a coherent length where to write compared to the buffer. It make the code reading easier.
Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2012-11-14 13:27:15 EST
mcrypt-2.6.8-10.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2012-11-14 13:29:07 EST
mcrypt-2.6.8-10.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.