On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 2:43 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 10:58:14AM +0100, Mauro Matteo Cascella wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 9:52 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 09:27:51PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 9:20 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 08:19:41PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > +Mauro & Alex
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12/21/21 15:48, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > When bus is looked up on a pci write, we didn't
> > > > > > > validate that the lookup succeeded.
> > > > > > > Fuzzers thus can trigger QEMU crash by dereferencing the NULL
> > > > > > > bus pointer.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fixes: b32bd763a1 ("pci: introduce acpi-index property for PCI
> > > > > > > device")
> > > > > > > Cc: "Igor Mammedov" <imamm...@redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Fixes: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/770
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems this problem is important enough to get a CVE assigned.
> > > > >
> > > > > Guest root can crash guest.
> > > > > I don't see why we would assign a CVE.
> > > >
> > > > Well thinking about downstream distributions, if there is a CVE
> > > > assigned,
> > > > it helps them to have it written in the commit. Maybe I am mistaken.
> > > >
> > > > Unrelated but it seems there is a coordination problem with the
> > > > qemu-security@ list,
> > > > if this isn't a security issue, why was a CVE requested?
> > >
> > > Right. I don't think a priveleged user crashing VM warrants a CVE,
> > > it can just halt a CPU or whatever. Just cancel the CVE request pls.
> >
> > While I agree with you that this is kind of borderline and I expressed
> > similar concerns in the past, I was told that:
> >
> > 1) root guest users are not necessarily trustworthy (from the host
> > perspective).
> > 2) NULL pointer deref and similar issues caused by an
> > ill-handled/error condition are CVE worthy, even if triggered by root.
> > 3) In other cases, DoS triggered by root is not a security issue
> > because it's an expected behavior and not an ill-handled/error
> > condition (think of assert failures, for example).
> >
> > In other words, "ill-handled condition" is the crucial factor that
> > makes a bug CVE worthy or not.
>
> I guess the point is that a downstream might have a slightly different
> code path where it would be more serious ...
> OK then, not a big deal for me. So what's the CVE # then?
CVE-2021-4158 has been assigned for this issue.
> > +Prasad, can you shed some light on this? Is my understanding correct?
> >
> > Also, please note that we regularly get CVE requests for bugs like
> > this and many CVEs have been assigned in the past. Of course that
> > doesn't mean we can't change things going forward, but I think we
> > should make it clear (probably here:
> > https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/system/security.html) that these
> > kinds of bugs are not eligible for CVE assignment.
Thanks.
--
Mauro Matteo Cascella
Red Hat Product Security
PGP-Key ID: BB3410B0
