Bug 119136 - CAN-2004-2259 vsftpd is very secure but not very stable
Summary: CAN-2004-2259 vsftpd is very secure but not very stable
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: vsftpd
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Bill Nottingham
QA Contact: Mike McLean
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2004-03-25 13:57 UTC by Olivier Baudron
Modified: 2014-03-17 02:43 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version: 1.2.1-4
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-04-29 03:03:36 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Fix block/unblock signal bug (1.54 KB, text/plain)
2004-03-25 13:59 UTC, Olivier Baudron
no flags Details


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2004:164 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Updated vsftpd package fixes signal handling bug 2004-05-11 04:00:00 UTC

Description Olivier Baudron 2004-03-25 13:57:22 UTC
There is a signal handle problem in vsftpd-1.2.1-2.

The SIGCHLD handle is a complexe function with malloc()s and free()s
inside. Neither malloc() nor free() is re-entrant, so the SIGCHLD
signal must be caught only at safe locations.

This is not the case:

// Pseudo-code
standalone.c:
    unblock_signal(SIGCHLD)
    socket = my_accept(...)
    block_signal(SIGCHLD)

sysutil.c:
    my_accept(...) {
        malloc(...)   // BUG: may be interrupted!
        free(...)     // BUG: may be interrupted!
        accept(...)
    }
// End

The unblock/block mecanism must be used more strictly around the
blocking systems calls. A patch follows. Hopefully, it will fix
bug 109933.

Comment 1 Olivier Baudron 2004-03-25 13:59:47 UTC
Created attachment 98850 [details]
Fix block/unblock signal bug

Comment 2 Olivier Baudron 2004-04-28 08:46:53 UTC
I reported the problem to the author and the issue has been fixed in
the new upstream release 1.2.2. The patch is a bit different of mine.
Some structures have been rewritten so that malloc() and free() are
not used  in the "accept" routine.

Comment 3 Bill Nottingham 2004-04-29 03:03:36 UTC
This is patched in 1.2.1-4.

Comment 4 John Flanagan 2004-05-12 03:20:40 UTC
An errata 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/RHBA-2004-164.html



Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.