CVE-2019-3701

An issue was discovered in can_can_gw_rcv in net/can/gw.c in the Linux kernel through 4.19.13. The CAN frame modification rules allow bitwise logical operations that can be also applied to the can_dlc field. The privileged user root with CAP_NET_ADMIN can create a CAN frame modification rule that makes the data length code a higher value than the available CAN frame data size. In combination with a configured checksum calculation where the result is stored relatively to the end of the data (e.g. cgw_csum_xor_rel) the tail of the skb (e.g. frag_list pointer in skb_shared_info) can be rewritten which finally can cause a system crash. Because of a missing check, the CAN drivers may write arbitrary content beyond the data registers in the CAN controllers I/O memory when processing can-gw manipulated outgoing frames.

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://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2020-04/msg00035.html
• http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/106443
• https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120386
• https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git/commit/?id=0aaa81377c5a01f686bcdb8c7a6929a7bf330c68
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/03/msg00034.html
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/04/msg00004.html
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/05/msg00002.html
• https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev\u0026m=154651842302479\u0026w=2
• https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev\u0026m=154661373531512\u0026w=2
• https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K17957133
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3932-1/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3932-2/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/4115-1/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/4118-1/
• http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2020-04/msg00035.html
• http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/106443
• https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120386
• https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git/commit/?id=0aaa81377c5a01f686bcdb8c7a6929a7bf330c68
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/03/msg00034.html
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/04/msg00004.html
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/05/msg00002.html
• https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev\u0026m=154651842302479\u0026w=2
• https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev\u0026m=154661373531512\u0026w=2
• https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K17957133
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3932-1/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/3932-2/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/4115-1/
• https://usn.ubuntu.com/4118-1/