crypto/tls: large handshake records may cause panics (CVE-2022-41724) #58001
Labels
FrozenDueToAge
NeedsFix
The path to resolution is known, but the work has not been done.
release-blocker
Security
Milestone
Comments
mknyszek
added
the
NeedsFix
|
@gopherbot please open backport issues. |
This was referenced Feb 6, 2023
|
Backport issue(s) opened: #58358 (for 1.19), #58359 (for 1.20). Remember to create the cherry-pick CL(s) as soon as the patch is submitted to master, according to https://go.dev/wiki/MinorReleases. |
|
Change https://go.dev/cl/468125 mentions this issue: |
|
Change https://go.dev/cl/468121 mentions this issue: |
|
Change https://go.dev/cl/468117 mentions this issue: |
gopherbot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 14, 2023
Message marshalling makes use of BytesOrPanic a lot, under the assumption that it will never panic. This assumption was incorrect, and specifically crafted handshakes could trigger panics. Rather than just surgically replacing the usages of BytesOrPanic in paths that could panic, replace all usages of it with proper error returns in case there are other ways of triggering panics which we didn't find. In one specific case, the tree routed by expandLabel, we replace the usage of BytesOrPanic, but retain a panic. This function already explicitly panicked elsewhere, and returning an error from it becomes rather painful because it requires changing a large number of APIs. The marshalling is unlikely to ever panic, as the inputs are all either fixed length, or already limited to the sizes required. If it were to panic, it'd likely only be during development. A close inspection shows no paths for a user to cause a panic currently. This patches ends up being rather large, since it requires routing errors back through functions which previously had no error returns. Where possible I've tried to use helpers that reduce the verbosity of frequently repeated stanzas, and to make the diffs as minimal as possible. Thanks to Marten Seemann for reporting this issue. Updates #58001 Fixes #58359 Fixes CVE-2022-41724 Change-Id: Ieb55867ef0a3e1e867b33f09421932510cb58851 Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1679436 Reviewed-by: Julie Qiu <julieqiu@google.com> TryBot-Result: Security TryBots <security-trybots@go-security-trybots.iam.gserviceaccount.com> Run-TryBot: Roland Shoemaker <bracewell@google.com> Reviewed-by: Damien Neil <dneil@google.com> (cherry picked from commit 1d4e6ca9454f6cf81d30c5361146fb5988f1b5f6) Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1728205 Reviewed-by: Tatiana Bradley <tatianabradley@google.com> Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/468121 Reviewed-by: Than McIntosh <thanm@google.com> Auto-Submit: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> TryBot-Bypass: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> Run-TryBot: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com>
gopherbot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 14, 2023
Message marshalling makes use of BytesOrPanic a lot, under the assumption that it will never panic. This assumption was incorrect, and specifically crafted handshakes could trigger panics. Rather than just surgically replacing the usages of BytesOrPanic in paths that could panic, replace all usages of it with proper error returns in case there are other ways of triggering panics which we didn't find. In one specific case, the tree routed by expandLabel, we replace the usage of BytesOrPanic, but retain a panic. This function already explicitly panicked elsewhere, and returning an error from it becomes rather painful because it requires changing a large number of APIs. The marshalling is unlikely to ever panic, as the inputs are all either fixed length, or already limited to the sizes required. If it were to panic, it'd likely only be during development. A close inspection shows no paths for a user to cause a panic currently. This patches ends up being rather large, since it requires routing errors back through functions which previously had no error returns. Where possible I've tried to use helpers that reduce the verbosity of frequently repeated stanzas, and to make the diffs as minimal as possible. Thanks to Marten Seemann for reporting this issue. Updates #58001 Fixes #58358 Fixes CVE-2022-41724 Change-Id: Ieb55867ef0a3e1e867b33f09421932510cb58851 Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1679436 Reviewed-by: Julie Qiu <julieqiu@google.com> TryBot-Result: Security TryBots <security-trybots@go-security-trybots.iam.gserviceaccount.com> Run-TryBot: Roland Shoemaker <bracewell@google.com> Reviewed-by: Damien Neil <dneil@google.com> (cherry picked from commit 0f3a44ad7b41cc89efdfad25278953e17d9c1e04) Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1728204 Reviewed-by: Tatiana Bradley <tatianabradley@google.com> Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/468117 Auto-Submit: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> Run-TryBot: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org> Reviewed-by: Than McIntosh <thanm@google.com>
prattmic
changed the title
|
Is there a reproducer available for this issue @rolandshoemaker ? |
johanbrandhorst
pushed a commit
to Pryz/go
that referenced
this issue
Feb 22, 2023
Message marshalling makes use of BytesOrPanic a lot, under the assumption that it will never panic. This assumption was incorrect, and specifically crafted handshakes could trigger panics. Rather than just surgically replacing the usages of BytesOrPanic in paths that could panic, replace all usages of it with proper error returns in case there are other ways of triggering panics which we didn't find. In one specific case, the tree routed by expandLabel, we replace the usage of BytesOrPanic, but retain a panic. This function already explicitly panicked elsewhere, and returning an error from it becomes rather painful because it requires changing a large number of APIs. The marshalling is unlikely to ever panic, as the inputs are all either fixed length, or already limited to the sizes required. If it were to panic, it'd likely only be during development. A close inspection shows no paths for a user to cause a panic currently. This patches ends up being rather large, since it requires routing errors back through functions which previously had no error returns. Where possible I've tried to use helpers that reduce the verbosity of frequently repeated stanzas, and to make the diffs as minimal as possible. Thanks to Marten Seemann for reporting this issue. Fixes golang#58001 Fixes CVE-2022-41724 Change-Id: Ieb55867ef0a3e1e867b33f09421932510cb58851 Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1679436 Reviewed-by: Julie Qiu <julieqiu@google.com> TryBot-Result: Security TryBots <security-trybots@go-security-trybots.iam.gserviceaccount.com> Run-TryBot: Roland Shoemaker <bracewell@google.com> Reviewed-by: Damien Neil <dneil@google.com> Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/468125 Run-TryBot: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> Reviewed-by: Than McIntosh <thanm@google.com> TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org> Auto-Submit: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com>
romaindoumenc
pushed a commit
to TroutSoftware/go
that referenced
this issue
Mar 3, 2023
Message marshalling makes use of BytesOrPanic a lot, under the assumption that it will never panic. This assumption was incorrect, and specifically crafted handshakes could trigger panics. Rather than just surgically replacing the usages of BytesOrPanic in paths that could panic, replace all usages of it with proper error returns in case there are other ways of triggering panics which we didn't find. In one specific case, the tree routed by expandLabel, we replace the usage of BytesOrPanic, but retain a panic. This function already explicitly panicked elsewhere, and returning an error from it becomes rather painful because it requires changing a large number of APIs. The marshalling is unlikely to ever panic, as the inputs are all either fixed length, or already limited to the sizes required. If it were to panic, it'd likely only be during development. A close inspection shows no paths for a user to cause a panic currently. This patches ends up being rather large, since it requires routing errors back through functions which previously had no error returns. Where possible I've tried to use helpers that reduce the verbosity of frequently repeated stanzas, and to make the diffs as minimal as possible. Thanks to Marten Seemann for reporting this issue. Updates golang#58001 Fixes golang#58359 Fixes CVE-2022-41724 Change-Id: Ieb55867ef0a3e1e867b33f09421932510cb58851 Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1679436 Reviewed-by: Julie Qiu <julieqiu@google.com> TryBot-Result: Security TryBots <security-trybots@go-security-trybots.iam.gserviceaccount.com> Run-TryBot: Roland Shoemaker <bracewell@google.com> Reviewed-by: Damien Neil <dneil@google.com> (cherry picked from commit 1d4e6ca9454f6cf81d30c5361146fb5988f1b5f6) Reviewed-on: https://team-review.git.corp.google.com/c/golang/go-private/+/1728205 Reviewed-by: Tatiana Bradley <tatianabradley@google.com> Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/468121 Reviewed-by: Than McIntosh <thanm@google.com> Auto-Submit: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> TryBot-Bypass: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com> Run-TryBot: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com>
This was referenced Apr 4, 2023
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Both clients and servers may send large TLS handshake records which cause servers and clients,
respectively, to panic when attempting to construct responses.
This affects all TLS 1.3 clients, TLS 1.2 clients which explicitly enable session resumption
(by setting Config.ClientSessionCache to a non-nil value), and TLS 1.3 servers which request
client certificates (by setting Config.ClientAuth >= RequestClientCert).
Thanks to Marten Seemann for reporting this issue.
This is a PRIVATE issue for CVE-2022-41724, tracked in http://b/261456191 and fixed by http://tg/1679436.
/cc @golang/security and @golang/release
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: