Skip to content

Conversation

AcrylicRobin
Copy link

@AcrylicRobin AcrylicRobin commented Nov 6, 2023

Copy link

@jym2584 jym2584 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CVE-2015-7566: 3 upvotes
CVE-2019-12369: 1 upvote
I think you covered a lot of the aspects of CVE-2015-7566. The read (as well as the Bugzilla report) was intriguing and wanted to make me learn more

Comment on lines +59 to +60
When using a USB device that lacks a bulk-out endpoint (what sends data from the host to the device),
a NULL pointer error occurs. This causes the system to crash which can lead to more errors and corruption.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think more background would be nice in this. Where was it introduced? What kind of data is the host sending to the device that is causing this crash?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Found the how of the vulnerability under:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283371


Description:
The bug was found using the USB-fuzzing framework vUSBf from Sergej Schumilo 
(github.com/schumilo) using the following device descriptor:

 ######### PAYLOAD 1 #########
[*] Device-Descriptor
  bLength:		0x12
  bDescriptorType:	0x1
  bcdUSB:		0x200
  bDeviceClass:		0x3
  bDeviceSubClass:	0x0
  bDeviceProtocol:	0x0
  bMaxPacketSize:	0x40
  idVendor:		0x54c
  idProduct:		0x144
  bcdDevice:		0x100
  iManufacturer:	0x1
  iProduct:		0x2
  iSerialNumbers:	0x3
  bNumConfigurations:	0x1

The clie_5_attach function of the visor driver, which is called during the driver initialization process, expects an OUT-Bulk-Endpoint. 
Due to an incomplete sanity check, the visor driver tries to dereference null-pointers. 
This results in a crash of the system.

answer: Ralf Spenneberg of OpenSource Security reported the issue. Does not specify how it was found.
automated: False
contest: False
developer: False
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could it be possibly inferred that a developer would have found it? I took a look at his LinkedIn profile and he seems to be a cybersecurity analyst

why you come to that conclusion.
note:
answer:
note: You can brute force (or check physically) for this check if it was accounted for.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The discussion of the bugzilla report says that a fuzzer was used to discover this vulnerability, so it is definitely accounted for

note:
answer: True
note: |
An unprivileged user with physical access could trigger a kernel NULL-pointer dereference.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure if this is related to sandboxing as far as I'm aware

answer:
note:
answer: True
note: Code was reviewed before it was committed.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you able to provide a bit more detail into who contributed towards this fix?

free to give it a small name and add one in the same format as these.
defense_in_depth:
applies:
applies: False
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this definitely applies since judging by the commit history, it seems like whoever wrote this code seemed to have forgot to add some logic
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=cb3232138e37129e88240a98a1d2aba2187ff57c

security
description:
description: |
A possible memory leak in the Linux drivers. This issue can lead to a situation where the
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The transition in wording from this line to the description of the vulnerability could be better

note:
answer: False
note: |
This is unrealted to permissions.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unrelated

answer:
note:
answer: True
note: Code was reviewed before it was comitted.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

committed

@zjk4571
Copy link

zjk4571 commented Nov 15, 2023

After the changes that jym2584 made, I think that your YAMLs have sufficient data.
+2 upvotes for CVE-2019-12379
+2 upvote for CVE-2015-7566

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants