Onderwerp: uml_net bug

There is a vulnerability in uml_net. The latest version is vulnerable too.
The problem is the lack of bounds checking in uml_net.c from uml_utilities,
A possible attack could lead to root compromise on some systems since for
example uml_net comes suided root in RH 8.0 by default.

Let's look over the code:

* int n = 3, v;

we observe how "v" is declared, as a signed integer.
with a little bit of "luck" will end up here, knowing that "v" will get
the value of the first parameter (an integer) given to the program:

* if(v > CURRENT_VERSION)

so... if "v" is smaller than 0, the test will be passed but "v" will not
be between 0 and CURRENT_VERSION as the author would expected to.
after some tests on the second parameter of the program... we should
arrive to this code:

* if(handlers[v] != NULL) (*handlers[v])(argc - n, &argv[n]);

here it is called the function located at handlers[v]. by suplying a large
negative integer for "v", handlers[v] can point to the stack which can be
controlled by the user. so, the program can be fooled to call a user
controlled "function".
since the root privileges are not dropped till this point... the user code
will be executed with super-user privileges.



Suggested patch: uml_net.c

- if(v > CURRENT_VERSION){
+ if ((v > CURRENT_VERSION) || (v < 0)) {

Contact: ktha@hushmail.com

Dear Ktha,

The problem is different: uml_net shouldn't be suid.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2003-056.html

Details:

An updated kernel-utils package is available that removes the setuid bits
incorrectly assigned to the uml_net binary.



--Saturday, May 24, 2003, 5:10:07 AM, you wrote to bugtraq@securityfocus.com:



K> There is a vulnerability in uml_net. The latest version is vulnerable too.

K> The problem is the lack of bounds checking in uml_net.c from uml_utilities,

K> A possible attack could lead to root compromise on some systems since for

K> example uml_net comes suided root in RH 8.0 by default.



K> Let's look over the code:



K> * int n = 3, v;



K> we observe how "v" is declared, as a signed integer.

K> with a little bit of "luck" will end up here, knowing that "v" will get

K> the value of the first parameter (an integer) given to the program:



K> * if(v > CURRENT_VERSION)



K> so... if "v" is smaller than 0, the test will be passed but "v" will not

K> be between 0 and CURRENT_VERSION as the author would expected to.

K> after some tests on the second parameter of the program... we should

K> arrive to this code:



K> * if(handlers[v] != NULL) (*handlers[v])(argc - n, &argv[n]);



K> here it is called the function located at handlers[v]. by suplying a large

K> negative integer for "v", handlers[v] can point to the stack which can be

K> controlled by the user. so, the program can be fooled to call a user

K> controlled "function".

K> since the root privileges are not dropped till this point... the user code

K> will be executed with super-user privileges.







K> Suggested patch: uml_net.c



K> - if(v > CURRENT_VERSION){

K> + if ((v > CURRENT_VERSION) || (v < 0)) {



K> Contact: ktha@hushmail.com



--
~/ZARAZA
You know my name - look up my number (Beatles)