[028/101] cifs: fix possible memory corruption in CIFSFindNext

[Greg KH]

2.6.33-longterm review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>

commit 9438fabb73eb48055b58b89fc51e0bc4db22fabd upstream.

The name_len variable in CIFSFindNext is a signed int that gets set to
the resume_name_len in the cifs_search_info. The resume_name_len however
is unsigned and for some infolevels is populated directly from a 32 bit
value sent by the server.

If the server sends a very large value for this, then that value could
look negative when converted to a signed int. That would make that
value pass the PATH_MAX check later in CIFSFindNext. The name_len would
then be used as a length value for a memcpy. It would then be treated
as unsigned again, and the memcpy scribbles over a ton of memory.

Fix this by making the name_len an unsigned value in CIFSFindNext.

Reported-by: Darren Lavender <dcl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <sfrench@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>

---
 fs/cifs/cifssmb.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c
+++ b/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c
@@ -3596,7 +3596,8 @@ int CIFSFindNext(const int xid, struct c
 	T2_FNEXT_RSP_PARMS *parms;
 	char *response_data;
 	int rc = 0;
-	int bytes_returned, name_len;
+	int bytes_returned;
+	unsigned int name_len;
 	__u16 params, byte_count;
 
 	cFYI(1, ("In FindNext"));


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/