CVE-2010-3904

The rds_page_copy_user function in net/rds/page.c in the Reliable Datagram Sockets (RDS) protocol implementation in the Linux kernel before 2.6.36 does not properly validate addresses obtained from user space, which allows local users to gain privileges via crafted use of the sendmsg and recvmsg system calls.

Weakness

The product receives input that is expected to specify a quantity (such as size or length), but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the quantity has the required properties.

Affected Software

Name	Vendor	Start Version	End Version
Linux_kernel	Linux	*	2.6.36 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	RedHat	kernel-0:2.6.18-194.17.4.el5	*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	RedHat	kernel-0:2.6.32-71.7.1.el6	*
Linux	Ubuntu	karmic	*
Linux	Ubuntu	lucid	*
Linux	Ubuntu	maverick	*
Linux	Ubuntu	upstream	*
Linux-ec2	Ubuntu	karmic	*
Linux-ec2	Ubuntu	lucid	*
Linux-ec2	Ubuntu	maverick	*
Linux-fsl-imx51	Ubuntu	karmic	*
Linux-fsl-imx51	Ubuntu	lucid	*
Linux-lts-backport-maverick	Ubuntu	lucid	*
Linux-mvl-dove	Ubuntu	karmic	*
Linux-mvl-dove	Ubuntu	lucid	*
Linux-mvl-dove	Ubuntu	maverick	*
Linux-ti-omap4	Ubuntu	maverick	*

Extended Description

Specified quantities include size, length, frequency, price, rate, number of operations, time, and others. Code may rely on specified quantities to allocate resources, perform calculations, control iteration, etc.

Potential Mitigations

Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

NVD	https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2010-3904
CWE	https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1284.html

Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input

Weakness

Affected Software

Extended Description

Potential Mitigations

References