Bug 698057 - (CVE-2011-1598, CVE-2011-1748) CVE-2011-1598 CVE-2011-1748 kernel: missing check in can/bcm and can/raw socket releases
CVE-2011-1598 CVE-2011-1748 kernel: missing check in can/bcm and can/raw sock...
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Red Hat Product Security
: Security
Depends On: 698482 698483 698484
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2011-04-20 00:26 EDT by Eugene Teo (Security Response)
Modified: 2015-07-29 13:47 EDT (History)
13 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-07-29 08:40:17 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Eugene Teo (Security Response) 2011-04-20 00:26:45 EDT
Reported by Dave Jones. We can get here with a NULL socket argument passed from userspace, so we need to handle it accordingly.

can/bcm release: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/192898

Reported by Oliver Hartkopp; can/raw release:

can/raw release: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/192974
Comment 3 Eugene Teo (Security Response) 2011-04-20 20:48:16 EDT
Reported by Oliver Hartkopp; can/raw release: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/192974

Acknowledgements CVE-2011-1748:

Red Hat would like to thank Oliver Hartkopp for reporting this issue.
Comment 4 Eugene Teo (Security Response) 2011-04-20 20:49:47 EDT

The Linux kernel as shipped with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, 4 and 5 did not
include support for the CAN protocol, and therefore are not affected by this
issue. This has been addressed in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 and Red Hat Enterprise MRG via https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-0836.html, and https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1253.html.
Comment 5 Dave Jones 2011-04-20 21:01:23 EDT
note that the two patches in comment 1 and comment 2 address two separate issues in the same protocol.  Same bug, different code paths.
Comment 7 errata-xmlrpc 2011-06-01 15:57:07 EDT
This issue has been addressed in following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6

Via RHSA-2011:0836 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-0836.html
Comment 8 Vincent Danen 2011-09-02 00:11:30 EDT
Acknowledgements CVE-2011-1598:

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2011-09-12 15:45:19 EDT
This issue has been addressed in following products:

  MRG for RHEL-6 v.2

Via RHSA-2011:1253 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1253.html

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