Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:52:07 +0200
From: Stefan Cornelius <scorneli@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Heap overflow and DoS in unzip 6.0

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:10:17 -0300
Gustavo Grieco <gustavo.grieco@...il.com> wrote:
> AFAIK, upstream is still working on the heap overflow issue (the DoS
> is fixed in the last unzip beta). In concrete, they said:
> 
> "My initial (quick) analysis suggested that the basic problem is
> corrupt (unrealistic) Extra-Field sizes, which UnZip does not check
> well enough. I need to verify that that is the cause, and then figure
> out what to do about it. Currently, if the program sees an Extra-Field
> length of, say, 0x1007, it tends to believe it, even if that's bigger
> than the actual archive member's length (or perhaps even bigger than
> the whole archive). If it actually tries to read data which haven't
> been read, then valgrind gets upset (with good reason). At least
> that's what I believe so far."
>

I've tried to contact upstream via the contact form to share my
analysis. So far, I've had no response, so I'll share it here:

I believe the root cause for this issue is in extract.c around line
1250:
"""
        if (G.lrec.compression_method == STORED) {
            zusz_t csiz_decrypted = G.lrec.csize;

            if (G.pInfo->encrypted)
                csiz_decrypted -= 12; ##### BOOOOM 
            if (G.lrec.ucsize != csiz_decrypted) {
                Info(slide, 0x401, ((char *)slide,
                  LoadFarStringSmall2(WrnStorUCSizCSizDiff),
                  FnFilter1(G.filename),
                  FmZofft(G.lrec.ucsize, NULL, "u"),

So there can be an integer overflow if csiz_decrypted is smaller than
12: if (G.pInfo->encrypted)
                csiz_decrypted -= 12;
"""

Did anyone come to a similar conclusion? Also, the subsequent unzip
processing after this underflow exposed a lot of other places where
additional hardening may be a very good idea. Is somebody working on
that?

Thanks,
-- 
Stefan Cornelius / Red Hat Product Security

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.