Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:41344 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755414Ab2FZL05 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2012 07:26:57 -0400 From: Samuel Ortiz To: "John W. Linville" Cc: Lauro Ramos Venancio , Aloisio Almeida Jr , Ilan Elias , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfc@lists.01.org, Dan Rosenberg , stable@kernel.org, security@kernel.org, Samuel Ortiz , "David S. Miller" Subject: [PATCH 1/2] NFC: Prevent multiple buffer overflows in NCI Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:37:37 +0200 Message-Id: <1340710659-15555-2-git-send-email-sameo@linux.intel.com> (sfid-20120626_132700_101928_0D413AA8) In-Reply-To: <1340710659-15555-1-git-send-email-sameo@linux.intel.com> References: <1340710659-15555-1-git-send-email-sameo@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Dan Rosenberg Fix multiple remotely-exploitable stack-based buffer overflows due to the NCI code pulling length fields directly from incoming frames and copying too much data into statically-sized arrays. Signed-off-by: Dan Rosenberg Cc: stable@kernel.org Cc: security@kernel.org Cc: Lauro Ramos Venancio Cc: Aloisio Almeida Jr Cc: Samuel Ortiz Cc: David S. Miller Acked-by: Ilan Elias Signed-off-by: Samuel Ortiz --- net/nfc/nci/ntf.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c b/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c index cb26461..2ab196a 100644 --- a/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c +++ b/net/nfc/nci/ntf.c @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static __u8 *nci_extract_rf_params_nfca_passive_poll(struct nci_dev *ndev, nfca_poll->sens_res = __le16_to_cpu(*((__u16 *)data)); data += 2; - nfca_poll->nfcid1_len = *data++; + nfca_poll->nfcid1_len = min_t(__u8, *data++, NFC_NFCID1_MAXSIZE); pr_debug("sens_res 0x%x, nfcid1_len %d\n", nfca_poll->sens_res, nfca_poll->nfcid1_len); @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ static __u8 *nci_extract_rf_params_nfcb_passive_poll(struct nci_dev *ndev, struct rf_tech_specific_params_nfcb_poll *nfcb_poll, __u8 *data) { - nfcb_poll->sensb_res_len = *data++; + nfcb_poll->sensb_res_len = min_t(__u8, *data++, NFC_SENSB_RES_MAXSIZE); pr_debug("sensb_res_len %d\n", nfcb_poll->sensb_res_len); @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ static __u8 *nci_extract_rf_params_nfcf_passive_poll(struct nci_dev *ndev, __u8 *data) { nfcf_poll->bit_rate = *data++; - nfcf_poll->sensf_res_len = *data++; + nfcf_poll->sensf_res_len = min_t(__u8, *data++, NFC_SENSF_RES_MAXSIZE); pr_debug("bit_rate %d, sensf_res_len %d\n", nfcf_poll->bit_rate, nfcf_poll->sensf_res_len); @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ static int nci_extract_activation_params_iso_dep(struct nci_dev *ndev, switch (ntf->activation_rf_tech_and_mode) { case NCI_NFC_A_PASSIVE_POLL_MODE: nfca_poll = &ntf->activation_params.nfca_poll_iso_dep; - nfca_poll->rats_res_len = *data++; + nfca_poll->rats_res_len = min_t(__u8, *data++, 20); pr_debug("rats_res_len %d\n", nfca_poll->rats_res_len); if (nfca_poll->rats_res_len > 0) { memcpy(nfca_poll->rats_res, @@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ static int nci_extract_activation_params_iso_dep(struct nci_dev *ndev, case NCI_NFC_B_PASSIVE_POLL_MODE: nfcb_poll = &ntf->activation_params.nfcb_poll_iso_dep; - nfcb_poll->attrib_res_len = *data++; + nfcb_poll->attrib_res_len = min_t(__u8, *data++, 50); pr_debug("attrib_res_len %d\n", nfcb_poll->attrib_res_len); if (nfcb_poll->attrib_res_len > 0) { memcpy(nfcb_poll->attrib_res, -- 1.7.10