[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
Subject[PATCH 42/91] cifs: fix possible memory corruption in CIFSFindNext
2.6.27-longterm review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.


commit 9438fabb73eb48055b58b89fc51e0bc4db22fabd upstream.

The name_len variable in CIFSFindNext is a signed int that gets set to
the resume_name_len in the cifs_search_info. The resume_name_len however
is unsigned and for some infolevels is populated directly from a 32 bit
value sent by the server.

If the server sends a very large value for this, then that value could
look negative when converted to a signed int. That would make that
value pass the PATH_MAX check later in CIFSFindNext. The name_len would
then be used as a length value for a memcpy. It would then be treated
as unsigned again, and the memcpy scribbles over a ton of memory.

Fix this by making the name_len an unsigned value in CIFSFindNext.

Reported-by: Darren Lavender <>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <>
fs/cifs/cifssmb.c | 3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

Index: longterm-2.6.27/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c
--- longterm-2.6.27.orig/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c 2012-02-05 22:34:33.755917316 +0100
+++ longterm-2.6.27/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c 2012-02-05 22:34:40.813915010 +0100
@@ -3649,7 +3649,8 @@
char *response_data;
int rc = 0;
- int bytes_returned, name_len;
+ int bytes_returned;
+ unsigned int name_len;
__u16 params, byte_count;

cFYI(1, ("In FindNext"));

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-05 23:45    [W:0.264 / U:4.372 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site