1613765 - (CVE-2019-20503) Cherry-pick recent upstream security fix 1992: usersctp: out-of-bounds reads in sctp_load_addresses_from_init

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Networking, defect)

Description

[Jan-Ivar Bruaroey [:jib] (needinfo? me)]

See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=1992 and
https://github.com/sctplab/usrsctp/commit/790a7a2555aefb392a5a69923f1e9d17b4968467

It looks like we haven't applies this yet: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/3811b11b5773c1dccfe8228bfc7143b10a9a2a99/netwerk/sctp/src/netinet/sctp_auth.c#1458

Comment 1

[Jan-Ivar Bruaroey [:jib] (needinfo? me)]

Upstream bug is now publicly visible as 90 day disclosure deadline has expired.

Comment 2

[Daniel Veditz [:dveditz]]

Not the same bug, but is this a security fix, too?
https://github.com/sctplab/usrsctp/commit/0d166efa09c02d3d20d6379d31e7193178a620dc

Comment 3

[Daniel Veditz [:dveditz]]

How old is our copy of sctp? I can't find a version in a header file, but seems quite out of date according to https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/sctp/sctp_update.log#19

bug 1400563 might have been the last change we made to this code (Sept 2019).

Comment 4

[Daniel Veditz [:dveditz]]

I don't see any recent (post 2018) sctp bugfixes that the Chrome team flagged as security issues:
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component%3ABlink%3EWebRTC%20sctp%20type%3DBug-security&can=1&sort=-m

On the other hand these separate libraries are fuzzed and fixed independently and then uplifted to Chrome and sometimes don't communicate all the things that are actually fixed.

Comment 5

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

(In reply to Daniel Veditz [:dveditz] from comment #3)

How old is our copy of sctp? I can't find a version in a header file, but seems quite out of date according to https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/sctp/sctp_update.log#19

bug 1400563 might have been the last change we made to this code (Sept 2019).

I was actually surprised we had updated that recently (2017). I filed Bug 1613889 to track doing a new update, but I'll do the cherry pick here, because we'll need to figure out resourcing and prioritization for doing an update.

Comment 6

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

Attachment: Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 790a7a2; r=ng!

Comment 7

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

Attachment: Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 0d166e; r=ng!

Depends on D62071

Comment 8

[Randell Jesup [:jesup] (needinfo me)]

Updates are generally pretty easy for SCTP; I would only update to a known-good version, preferably one also being used by the chrome team.

I can help is needed

Comment 9

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

Comment on attachment 9125119 [details]
Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 0d166e; r=ng!

Security Approval Request

• How easily could an exploit be constructed based on the patch?: Unfortunately these patches are already public on the upstream repo so this question is moot.
• Do comments in the patch, the check-in comment, or tests included in the patch paint a bulls-eye on the security problem?: No
• Which older supported branches are affected by this flaw?: All
• If not all supported branches, which bug introduced the flaw?: None
• Do you have backports for the affected branches?: No
• If not, how different, hard to create, and risky will they be?: I expect the same patch to apply cleanly.
• How likely is this patch to cause regressions; how much testing does it need?: Unlikely since these are cherry picks from upstream.

Comment 10

[Tom Ritter [:tjr] (OOTO until 4/30 at least)]

Comment on attachment 9125119 [details]
Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 0d166e; r=ng!

Approved to land and request uplift.

Comment 11

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

Comment on attachment 9125119 [details]
Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 0d166e; r=ng!

Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request

• User impact if declined: Potential security problems.
• Is this code covered by automated tests?: Unknown
• Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: No
• Needs manual test from QE?: No
• If yes, steps to reproduce:
• List of other uplifts needed: None
• Risk to taking this patch: Low
• Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Low risk, this has already landed upstream.
• String changes made/needed: None

Comment 12

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

Are these patches going to land on m-c also or are we going straight to bug 1613889 there? I think the former is preferable, FWIW.

Comment 13

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM] from comment #12)

Are these patches going to land on m-c also or are we going straight to bug 1613889 there? I think the former is preferable, FWIW.

Sorry, I forgot to land these! Thanks for catching that.

Comment 14

[Sebastian Hengst [:aryx] (needinfo me if it's about an intermittent or backout)]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/efae21ce39a548a2ff2bb3849677628953046b1c
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/ecc0e7770308d4818efc63070d704d0de4a2a51c
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/efae21ce39a5
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/ecc0e7770308

Comment 15

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

Comment on attachment 9125118 [details]
Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 790a7a2; r=ng!

Fixes a publicly-disclosed sec bug in sctp. Approved for 74.0b5.

Comment 16

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/23240642f474
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/ea4d832cdde2

Does this need an ESR68 approval request too? Both patches graft cleanly.

Comment 17

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

Comment on attachment 9125119 [details]
Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 0d166e; r=ng!

ESR Uplift Approval Request

• If this is not a sec:{high,crit} bug, please state case for ESR consideration: Fixes publicly disclosed vulnerability in libsctp.
• User impact if declined: Potential crashes / security problems.
• Fix Landed on Version: 75
• Risk to taking this patch: Low
• Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): This is a cherry pick of an upstream fix.
• String or UUID changes made by this patch: None

Comment 18

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

Comment on attachment 9125118 [details]
Bug 1613765 - Cherry pick upstream sctp revision 790a7a2; r=ng!

Approved for 68.6esr.

Comment 19

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr68/rev/49a71f8da376
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr68/rev/818216eb93bd

Comment 20

[Tom Ritter [:tjr] (OOTO until 4/30 at least)]

Attachment: advisory.txt

Comment 21

[Tom Ritter [:tjr] (OOTO until 4/30 at least)]

Attachment: advisory.txt