merged to scartgap. Bruce
In message: [scarthgap][meta-virtualization][PATCH] libvirt: fix multiple CVEs on 26/06/2024 Hitendra Prajapati wrote: > Backport fixes for: > > * CVE-2024-1441 - Upstream-Status: Backport from > https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/commit/c664015fe3a7bf59db26686e9ed69af011c6ebb8 > * CVE-2024-2494 - Upstream-Status: Backport from > https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/commit/8a3f8d957507c1f8223fdcf25a3ff885b15557f2 > * CVE-2024-4418 - Upstream-Status: Backport from > https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/commit/8074d64dc2eca846d6a61efe1a9b7428a0ce1dd1 > > Signed-off-by: Hitendra Prajapati <hprajap...@mvista.com> > --- > .../libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-1441.patch | 70 ++++++ > .../libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-2494.patch | 220 ++++++++++++++++++ > .../libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-4418.patch | 86 +++++++ > recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt_10.0.0.bb | 3 + > 4 files changed, 379 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-1441.patch > create mode 100644 recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-2494.patch > create mode 100644 recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-4418.patch > > diff --git a/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-1441.patch > b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-1441.patch > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..3fbf1d52 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-1441.patch > @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ > +From c664015fe3a7bf59db26686e9ed69af011c6ebb8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > +From: Martin Kletzander <mklet...@redhat.com> > +Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 16:20:12 +0100 > +Subject: [PATCH] Fix off-by-one error in udevListInterfacesByStatus > +MIME-Version: 1.0 > +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > + > +Ever since this function was introduced in 2012 it could've tried > +filling in an extra interface name. That was made worse in 2019 when > +the caller functions started accepting NULL arrays of size 0. > + > +This is assigned CVE-2024-1441. > + > +Signed-off-by: Martin Kletzander <mklet...@redhat.com> > +Reported-by: Alexander Kuznetsov <kuznetso...@altlinux.org> > +Fixes: 5a33366f5c0b18c93d161bd144f9f079de4ac8ca > +Fixes: d6064e2759a24e0802f363e3a810dc5a7d7ebb15 > +Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jto...@redhat.com> > + > +Upstream-Status: Backport > [https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/commit/c664015fe3a7bf59db26686e9ed69af011c6ebb8] > +CVE: CVE-2024-1441 > +Signed-off-by: Hitendra Prajapati <hprajap...@mvista.com> > +--- > + NEWS.rst | 15 +++++++++++++++ > + src/interface/interface_backend_udev.c | 2 +- > + 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > + > +diff --git a/NEWS.rst b/NEWS.rst > +index d013fc7..25f2038 100644 > +--- a/NEWS.rst > ++++ b/NEWS.rst > +@@ -557,6 +557,21 @@ v9.2.0 (2023-04-01) > + v9.1.0 (2023-03-01) > + =================== > + > ++ * ``CVE-2024-1441``: Fix off-by-one error leading to a crash > ++ > ++ In **libvirt-1.0.0** there were couple of interface listing APIs > ++ introduced which had an off-by-one error. That error could lead to a > ++ very rare crash if an array was passed to those functions which did > ++ not fit all the interfaces. > ++ > ++ In **libvirt-5.10** a check for non-NULL arrays has been adjusted to > ++ allow for NULL arrays with size 0 instead of rejecting all NULL > ++ arrays. However that made the above issue significantly worse since > ++ that off-by-one error now did not write beyond an array, but > ++ dereferenced said NULL pointer making the crash certain in a > ++ specific scenario in which a NULL array of size 0 was passed to the > ++ aforementioned functions. > ++ > + * **Removed features** > + > + * vbox: removed support for version 5.2 and 6.0 APIs > +diff --git a/src/interface/interface_backend_udev.c > b/src/interface/interface_backend_udev.c > +index fb6799e..4091483 100644 > +--- a/src/interface/interface_backend_udev.c > ++++ b/src/interface/interface_backend_udev.c > +@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ udevListInterfacesByStatus(virConnectPtr conn, > + g_autoptr(virInterfaceDef) def = NULL; > + > + /* Ensure we won't exceed the size of our array */ > +- if (count > names_len) > ++ if (count >= names_len) > + break; > + > + path = udev_list_entry_get_name(dev_entry); > +-- > +2.25.1 > + > diff --git a/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-2494.patch > b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-2494.patch > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..6b38f13a > --- /dev/null > +++ b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-2494.patch > @@ -0,0 +1,220 @@ > +From 8a3f8d957507c1f8223fdcf25a3ff885b15557f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > +From: =?UTF-8?q?Daniel=20P=2E=20Berrang=C3=A9?= <berra...@redhat.com> > +Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 10:47:50 +0000 > +Subject: [PATCH] remote: check for negative array lengths before allocation > +MIME-Version: 1.0 > +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > + > +While the C API entry points will validate non-negative lengths > +for various parameters, the RPC server de-serialization code > +will need to allocate memory for arrays before entering the C > +API. These allocations will thus happen before the non-negative > +length check is performed. > + > +Passing a negative length to the g_new0 function will usually > +result in a crash due to the negative length being treated as > +a huge positive number. > + > +This was found and diagnosed by ALT Linux Team with AFLplusplus. > + > +CVE-2024-2494 > +Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mpriv...@redhat.com> > +Found-by: Alexandr Shashkin <duty...@altlinux.org> > +Co-developed-by: Alexander Kuznetsov <kuznetso...@altlinux.org> > +Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > + > +Upstream-Status: Backport > [https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/commit/8a3f8d957507c1f8223fdcf25a3ff885b15557f2] > +CVE: CVE-2024-2494 > +Signed-off-by: Hitendra Prajapati <hprajap...@mvista.com> > +--- > + src/remote/remote_daemon_dispatch.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > + src/rpc/gendispatch.pl | 5 +++ > + 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+) > + > +diff --git a/src/remote/remote_daemon_dispatch.c > b/src/remote/remote_daemon_dispatch.c > +index 7daf503..7542caa 100644 > +--- a/src/remote/remote_daemon_dispatch.c > ++++ b/src/remote/remote_daemon_dispatch.c > +@@ -2291,6 +2291,10 @@ > remoteDispatchDomainGetSchedulerParameters(virNetServer *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + if (!conn) > + goto cleanup; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_SCHEDULER_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -2339,6 +2343,10 @@ > remoteDispatchDomainGetSchedulerParametersFlags(virNetServer *server > G_GNUC_UNUS > + if (!conn) > + goto cleanup; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_SCHEDULER_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -2497,6 +2505,10 @@ remoteDispatchDomainBlockStatsFlags(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + goto cleanup; > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_BLOCK_STATS_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -2717,6 +2729,14 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetVcpuPinInfo(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + if (!(dom = get_nonnull_domain(conn, args->dom))) > + goto cleanup; > + > ++ if (args->ncpumaps < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("ncpumaps must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > ++ if (args->maplen < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("maplen must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->ncpumaps > REMOTE_VCPUINFO_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("ncpumaps > > REMOTE_VCPUINFO_MAX")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -2811,6 +2831,11 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetEmulatorPinInfo(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + if (!(dom = get_nonnull_domain(conn, args->dom))) > + goto cleanup; > + > ++ if (args->maplen < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("maplen must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > ++ > + /* Allocate buffers to take the results */ > + if (args->maplen > 0) > + cpumaps = g_new0(unsigned char, args->maplen); > +@@ -2858,6 +2883,14 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetVcpus(virNetServer *server > G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + if (!(dom = get_nonnull_domain(conn, args->dom))) > + goto cleanup; > + > ++ if (args->maxinfo < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("maxinfo must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > ++ if (args->maplen < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("maxinfo must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->maxinfo > REMOTE_VCPUINFO_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("maxinfo > > REMOTE_VCPUINFO_MAX")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -3096,6 +3129,10 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetMemoryParameters(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_MEMORY_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -3156,6 +3193,10 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetNumaParameters(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_NUMA_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -3216,6 +3257,10 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetBlkioParameters(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_BLKIO_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -3277,6 +3322,10 @@ remoteDispatchNodeGetCPUStats(virNetServer *server > G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_NODE_CPU_STATS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -3339,6 +3388,10 @@ remoteDispatchNodeGetMemoryStats(virNetServer *server > G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_NODE_MEMORY_STATS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -3514,6 +3567,10 @@ remoteDispatchDomainGetBlockIoTune(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + if (!conn) > + goto cleanup; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_BLOCK_IO_TUNE_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -5079,6 +5136,10 @@ > remoteDispatchDomainGetInterfaceParameters(virNetServer *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_DOMAIN_INTERFACE_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +@@ -5299,6 +5360,10 @@ remoteDispatchNodeGetMemoryParameters(virNetServer > *server G_GNUC_UNUSED, > + > + flags = args->flags; > + > ++ if (args->nparams < 0) { > ++ virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams must be > non-negative")); > ++ goto cleanup; > ++ } > + if (args->nparams > REMOTE_NODE_MEMORY_PARAMETERS_MAX) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, "%s", _("nparams too > large")); > + goto cleanup; > +diff --git a/src/rpc/gendispatch.pl b/src/rpc/gendispatch.pl > +index ea46a9d..17abadc 100755 > +--- a/src/rpc/gendispatch.pl > ++++ b/src/rpc/gendispatch.pl > +@@ -1070,6 +1070,11 @@ elsif ($mode eq "server") { > + print "\n"; > + > + if ($single_ret_as_list) { > ++ print " if (args->$single_ret_list_max_var < 0) {\n"; > ++ print " virReportError(VIR_ERR_RPC,\n"; > ++ print " \"%s\", > _(\"max$single_ret_list_name must be non-negative\"));\n"; > ++ print " goto cleanup;\n"; > ++ print " }\n"; > + print " if (args->$single_ret_list_max_var > > $single_ret_list_max_define) {\n"; > + print " virReportError(VIR_ERR_RPC,\n"; > + print " \"%s\", > _(\"max$single_ret_list_name > $single_ret_list_max_define\"));\n"; > +-- > +2.25.1 > + > diff --git a/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-4418.patch > b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-4418.patch > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..81189abb > --- /dev/null > +++ b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt/CVE-2024-4418.patch > @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@ > +From 8074d64dc2eca846d6a61efe1a9b7428a0ce1dd1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > +From: =?UTF-8?q?Daniel=20P=2E=20Berrang=C3=A9?= <berra...@redhat.com> > +Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:51:15 +0100 > +Subject: [PATCH] rpc: ensure temporary GSource is removed from client event > + loop > +MIME-Version: 1.0 > +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > + > +Users are seeing periodic segfaults from libvirt client apps, > +especially thread heavy ones like virt-manager. A typical > +stack trace would end up in the virNetClientIOEventFD method, > +with illegal access to stale stack data. eg > +The root cause is a bad assumption in the virNetClientIOEventLoop > +method. This method is run by whichever thread currently owns the > +buck, and is responsible for handling I/O. Inside a for(;;) loop, > +this method creates a temporary GSource, adds it to the event loop > +and runs g_main_loop_run(). When I/O is ready, the GSource callback > +(virNetClientIOEventFD) will fire and call g_main_loop_quit(), and > +return G_SOURCE_REMOVE which results in the temporary GSource being > +destroyed. A g_autoptr() will then remove the last reference. > + > +What was overlooked, is that a second thread can come along and > +while it can't enter virNetClientIOEventLoop, it will register an > +idle source that uses virNetClientIOWakeup to interrupt the > +original thread's 'g_main_loop_run' call. When this happens the > +virNetClientIOEventFD callback never runs, and so the temporary > +GSource is not destroyed. The g_autoptr() will remove a reference, > +but by virtue of still being attached to the event context, there > +is an extra reference held causing GSource to be leaked. The > +next time 'g_main_loop_run' is called, the original GSource will > +trigger its callback, and access data that was allocated on the > +stack by the previous thread, and likely SEGV. > + > +To solve this, the thread calling 'g_main_loop_run' must call > +g_source_destroy, immediately upon return, to guarantee that > +the temporary GSource is removed. > + > +CVE-2024-4418 > +Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jto...@redhat.com> > +Reported-by: Martin Shirokov <shirokovmar...@gmail.com> > +Tested-by: Martin Shirokov <shirokovmar...@gmail.com> > +Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > + > +Upstream-Status: Backport > [https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/commit/8074d64dc2eca846d6a61efe1a9b7428a0ce1dd1] > +CVE: CVE-2024-4418 > +Signed-off-by: Hitendra Prajapati <hprajap...@mvista.com> > +--- > + src/rpc/virnetclient.c | 14 +++++++++++++- > + 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > + > +diff --git a/src/rpc/virnetclient.c b/src/rpc/virnetclient.c > +index 68098b1..147b0d6 100644 > +--- a/src/rpc/virnetclient.c > ++++ b/src/rpc/virnetclient.c > +@@ -1657,7 +1657,7 @@ static int virNetClientIOEventLoop(virNetClient > *client, > + #endif /* !WIN32 */ > + int timeout = -1; > + virNetMessage *msg = NULL; > +- g_autoptr(GSource) G_GNUC_UNUSED source = NULL; > ++ g_autoptr(GSource) source = NULL; > + GIOCondition ev = 0; > + struct virNetClientIOEventData data = { > + .client = client, > +@@ -1721,6 +1721,18 @@ static int virNetClientIOEventLoop(virNetClient > *client, > + > + g_main_loop_run(client->eventLoop); > + > ++ /* > ++ * If virNetClientIOEventFD ran, this GSource will already be > ++ * destroyed due to G_SOURCE_REMOVE. It is harmless to re-destroy > ++ * it, since we still own a reference. > ++ * > ++ * If virNetClientIOWakeup ran, it will have interrupted the > ++ * g_main_loop_run call, before virNetClientIOEventFD could > ++ * run, and thus the GSource is still registered, and we need > ++ * to destroy it since it is referencing stack memory for 'data' > ++ */ > ++ g_source_destroy(source); > ++ > + #ifndef WIN32 > + ignore_value(pthread_sigmask(SIG_SETMASK, &oldmask, NULL)); > + #endif /* !WIN32 */ > +-- > +2.25.1 > + > diff --git a/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt_10.0.0.bb > b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt_10.0.0.bb > index 6b19b700..a33b6980 100644 > --- a/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt_10.0.0.bb > +++ b/recipes-extended/libvirt/libvirt_10.0.0.bb > @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ SRC_URI = > "http://libvirt.org/sources/libvirt-${PV}.tar.xz;name=libvirt \ > file://gnutls-helper.py \ > > file://0001-prevent-gendispatch.pl-generating-build-path-in-code.patch \ > > file://0001-messon.build-remove-build-path-information-to-avoid-.patch \ > + file://CVE-2024-1441.patch \ > + file://CVE-2024-2494.patch \ > + file://CVE-2024-4418.patch \ > " > > SRC_URI[libvirt.sha256sum] = > "8ba2e72ec8bdd2418554a1474c42c35704c30174b7611eaf9a16544b71bcf00a" > -- > 2.25.1 >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#8824): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-virtualization/message/8824 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/106885403/21656 Group Owner: meta-virtualization+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-virtualization/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
