CVE-2018-10880

Linux kernel is vulnerable to a stack-out-of-bounds write in the ext4 filesystem code when mounting and writing to a crafted ext4 image in ext4_update_inline_data(). An attacker could use this to cause a system crash and a denial of service.

Weakness

The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Potential Mitigations

• Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

• For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

• Be wary that a language’s interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.

• Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

• Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.

• Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.

• D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.

• Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application’s memory:

• Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.

• Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as “rebasing” (for Windows) and “prelinking” (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.

• For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

• Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.

• For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].

References

• http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/930639/
• http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/104907
• http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/106503
• https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2948
• https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200005
• https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2018-10880
• https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8cdb5240ec5928b20490a2bb34cb87e9a5f40226
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/07/msg00020.html
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3821-1/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3821-2/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3871-1/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3871-3/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3871-4/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3871-5/