Re: Overflows in minicom

From: Andi Kleen (akat_private)
Date: Mon May 11 1998 - 20:51:00 PDT

  • Next message: Stefan `Sec` Zehl: "Re: Overflows in minicom"

    Alan Cox <alanat_private> writes:
    
    > >  It seems minicom(distributed with slak3.4) have some overflow
    > > vulnerabilities, namely in the '-p' switch and when you pick a config
    > > file on the arguments. (a strcpy and a sprintf)
    > >
    > >  you may test it with:
    > >   $ minicom -p/dev/ttyp`perl -e =B4print "A" x 2500=B4`
    > >     (Some garbage)
    > >     Segmentation fault
    >
    > That appears to be an understatment at least with minicom 1.81. I've just
    > been through doing the usual snprintfing etc. It has stuff like
    >
    >         strcpy(buffer, getenv("TERM"))
    >
    > in it.
    >
    > Its also got a few I8N buffer overruns. This is something that seems to be
    > creeping into code as people update it. When you go from
    >
    >         char buf[31];
    >         sprintf(buf,"Hello %.30s",x)
    >
    > to
    >
    >         char buf[31];
    >         sprintf(buf, _("Hello %.10s"), x)
    >
    > you blow your protection since a user can set the NLSPATH and catalogs and
    > translate catalogs so that "Hello %.10s" becomes "%s"  opening up an
    > attack point.
    
    I assumed the libc would ignore NLSPATH when the app runs suid (similar
    like it does with LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc.). If it doesn't that is a bad bug.
    
    [... clickety click ... ]
    
    At least glibc 2.1 uses __secure_getenv() for NLSPATH. Don't know about 2.0,
    separate GNU gettext, or libc5.
    
    -Andi
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 13:53:16 PDT