Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 232523 - net-dns/dnsmasq <2.45 DHCP lease renewal crash (CVE-2008-3350)
Summary: net-dns/dnsmasq <2.45 DHCP lease renewal crash (CVE-2008-3350)
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Security
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vulnerabilities (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High minor (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Security
URL: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.networ...
Whiteboard: B3 [glsa]
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-07-20 23:22 UTC by Justin Bellmor
Modified: 2020-04-09 19:03 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Justin Bellmor 2008-07-20 23:22:01 UTC
dnsmasq 2.43 introduced a bug where an unknown client attempts to renew a lease causing a segfault. This has potential security implications. A new version upstream (and another for other issues) have been released to resolve this. One of my clients keeps triggering this bug, so I've had to isolate it for the time being.
Comment 1 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-20 23:55:42 UTC
Justin, do you have a reproducer for this issue? Either a client configuration, packet dump, or similar?

Patrick, can you please bump the package?
Comment 2 Justin Bellmor 2008-07-21 03:14:41 UTC
Snipped (and MAC address masked slightly) from my syslog:
Jul 20 22:53:34 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: DHCPREQUEST(eth1) 10.0.2.4 00:21:e9:44:af:XX 
Jul 20 22:53:34 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: DHCPNAK(eth1) 10.0.2.4 00:21:e9:44:af:XX wrong address
Jul 20 22:53:37 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: segfault at 10 ip 0805d69d sp bf8cc7e8 error 4 in dnsmasq[8048000+22000]
Jul 20 22:53:37 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: DHCPDISCOVER(eth1) 00:21:e9:44:af:XX 
Jul 20 22:53:37 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: DHCPOFFER(eth1) 10.0.0.86 00:21:e9:44:af:XX 
Jul 20 22:53:37 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: DHCPREQUEST(eth1) 10.0.2.4 00:21:e9:44:af:XX 
Jul 20 22:53:37 ansible dnsmasq[24246]: DHCPNAK(eth1) 10.0.2.4 00:21:e9:44:af:XX wrong network

I setup a NAT on my MacBook Pro (OS X) for the wireless and connected my iPhone to it, it was given a lease of 10.0.2.4. Then I connected to an AP on my dnsmasq-powered network and it attempts to acquire that lease (from a network range that dnsmasq doesn't deal with). dnsmasq isn't a fan and segfaults. My iPhone seems to be the client that triggers this most often, since it hops around so many networks throughout the day.

If you'd really like my config file, let me know and I'll attach an unmangled copy, but I have some public IPs in there so I'm in no rush to publicize them. If you don't mind an altered configuration, I can just mask the public IPs.
Comment 3 Patrick McLean gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 04:40:49 UTC
net-dns/dnsmasq-2.45 is now in the portage tree
Comment 4 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 09:05:12 UTC
Arches, please test and mark stable:
=net-dns/dnsmasq-2.45
Target keywords : "alpha amd64 arm hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 s390 sh sparc x86"
Comment 5 Tony Vroon (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 11:43:49 UTC
Stable AMD64 keyword for 2.45; tested on hardened Opteron 2218 and Core 2 Duo systems.
Comment 6 Markus Rothe (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 16:38:43 UTC
ppc64 stable
Comment 7 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 18:54:16 UTC
Stable for HPPA.
Comment 8 Friedrich Oslage (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 20:07:10 UTC
sparc stable
Comment 9 Raúl Porcel (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-21 20:15:59 UTC
alpha/ia64/x86 stable
Comment 10 Tobias Scherbaum (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-22 19:54:32 UTC
ppc stable
Comment 11 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-24 02:23:54 UTC
This issue looks similar to CVE-2008-3214, which was assigned to dnsmasq 2.25. A reproducer created by Jamie Strandboge [1] for that older version will also crash 2.43. Earlier versions are unaffected, and so is 2.44.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.oss.general/596/focus=635
Comment 12 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-24 02:24:08 UTC
GLSA vote: YES
Comment 13 Filip Golewski 2008-07-24 04:57:07 UTC
I have the same problem on gentoo hardened, and following lines in /var/log/grsec.log 

Jul 23 16:18:16 agryf grsec: signal 11 sent to /usr/sbin/dnsmasq[dnsmasq:25473] uid/euid:65534/65534 gid/egid:65534/65534, parent /sbin/init[init:1] uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0
Jul 24 05:12:15 agryf grsec: From 10.103.30.100: signal 11 sent to /usr/sbin/dnsmasq[dnsmasq:28201] uid/euid:65534/65534 gid/egid:65534/65534, parent /sbin/init[init:1] uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0

After moving to recent 2.45 version by simply renaming ebuild file :) problem seems to go away.

http://freshmeat.net/projects/dnsmasq/?branch_id=1991&release_id=281597

Maybe 2.43 should be masked before 2.45 approval?
Comment 14 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-24 11:17:07 UTC
Filip, it does not need to be masked since a later stable version is available. You should "emerge --sync" and update to that. Marking of a vulnerable version will be done via a GLSA and your local tools.
Comment 15 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-07-30 00:47:13 UTC
CVE-2008-3350 (http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2008-3350):
  dnsmasq 2.43 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon
  crash) by (1) sending a DHCPINFORM while lacking a DHCP lease, or (2)
  attempting to renew a nonexistent DHCP lease for an invalid subnet as an
  "unknown client," a different vulnerability than CVE-2008-3214.
Comment 16 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-03 21:52:49 UTC
I'll take the lack of an answer as a YES and filed a request together with bug 231282.
Comment 17 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-09-04 20:12:40 UTC
GLSA 200809-02