<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39437 >

A similar crashing bug was reported to the development list over a year
ago, but not logged in the bug database?

-------- Extract of Message --------
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Security bugs in Freeciv
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 14:31:24 +0200
From: Luigi Auriemma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

...

--------------------------------------------------------
A] memcpy crash in generic_handle_player_attribute_chunk
--------------------------------------------------------

handle_player_attribute_chunk (which points to
generic_handle_player_attribute_chunk) is a function used by both
client and server when a PACKET_PLAYER_ATTRIBUTE_CHUNK packet is
received.
The function acts like a reassembler of data for an allocated buffer
which can have a size of max 262144 bytes.
Exist two problems in this function:
- the length of the current chunk received (chunk_length) is not
   verified so using a negative value an attacker can bypass the initial
   check and can copy a huge amount of data ((unsigned)chunk_length) in
   the data buffer with the conseguent crash
- on 32 bit systems the check
   "chunk->offset + chunk->chunk_length > chunk->total_length" can be
   bypassed using a very big positive offset like 0x7fffffff which will
   allow the copying of data from our packet to the memory located at
   the allocated buffer plus the malformed offset.
   Doesn't seem possible to execute malicious code with this bug since
   the destination memory is usually invalid

 >From common/packets.c:

void generic_handle_player_attribute_chunk(struct player *pplayer,
                        const struct
                        packet_player_attribute_chunk
                        *chunk)
{
   freelog(LOG_DEBUG, "received attribute chunk %d/%d %d", chunk->offset,
       chunk->total_length, chunk->chunk_length);

   if (chunk->total_length < 0
       || chunk->total_length >= MAX_ATTRIBUTE_BLOCK
       || chunk->offset < 0
       || chunk->offset + chunk->chunk_length > chunk->total_length
       || (chunk->offset != 0
           && chunk->total_length !=
pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.length)) { /* wrong attribute data */
     if (pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data) {
       free(pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data);
       pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data = NULL;
     }
     pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.length = 0;
     freelog(LOG_ERROR, "Received wrong attribute chunk");
     return;
   }
   /* first one in a row */
   if (chunk->offset == 0) {
     if (pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data) {
       free(pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data);
       pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data = NULL;
     }
     pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data = fc_malloc
(chunk->total_length); pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.length =
chunk->total_length; }
   memcpy((char *) (pplayer->attribute_block_buffer.data) + chunk->offset,
      chunk->data, chunk->chunk_length);
   ...


----------------------------------------------
B] invalid memory access in handle_unit_orders
----------------------------------------------

The server's function handle_unit_orders doesn't check the maximum
length of the packet->length value which should not be bigger than
2000 (MAX_LEN_ROUTE) while is possible to use any positive number.
The crash could require different tries (usually 3) before happening.

 >From server/unithand.c:

void handle_unit_orders(struct player *pplayer,
                        struct packet_unit_orders *packet)
{
   struct unit *punit = player_find_unit_by_id(pplayer, packet->unit_id);
   struct tile *src_tile = map_pos_to_tile(packet->src_x, packet->src_y);
   int i;

   if (!punit || packet->length < 0 || punit->activity != ACTIVITY_IDLE) {
     return;
   }

   if (src_tile != punit->tile) {
     /* Failed sanity check.  Usually this happens if the orders were sent
      * in the previous turn, and the client thought the unit was in a
      * different position than it's actually in.  The easy solution is to
      * discard the packet.  We don't send an error message to the client
      * here (though maybe we should?). */
     return;
   }

   for (i = 0; i < packet->length; i++) {
   ...

Actually there is no proof-of-concept available, I have tested the bugs
here in practice and they work perfectly.

...



_______________________________________________
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

Reply via email to