File da80c2a8ed49427334af613c00df65ae301cacdd.patch of Package exim.import4604

Overview Repositories Revisions Requests Users Attributes Meta

File da80c2a8ed49427334af613c00df65ae301cacdd.patch of Package exim.import4604

From: Phil Pennock <pdp@exim.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 06:37:39 +0000 (-0400)
Subject: Extra paranoia around STARTTLS-with-data-in-buffer.
X-Git-Tag: exim-4_76_RC1~9
X-Git-Url: http://git.exim.org/exim.git/commitdiff_plain/da80c2a8ed49427334af613c00df65ae301cacdd

Extra paranoia around STARTTLS-with-data-in-buffer.
---

diff --git a/src/src/smtp_in.c b/src/src/smtp_in.c
index 2ef6977..500000b 100644
--- a/src/src/smtp_in.c
+++ b/src/src/smtp_in.c
@@ -3844,6 +3844,23 @@ while (done <= 0)
     toomany = FALSE;
     cmd_list[CMD_LIST_STARTTLS].is_mail_cmd = FALSE;
 
+    /* There's an attack where more data is read in past the STARTTLS command
+    before TLS is negotiated, then assumed to be part of the secure session
+    when used afterwards; we use segregated input buffers, so are not
+    vulnerable, but we want to note when it happens and, for sheer paranoia,
+    ensure that the buffer is "wiped".
+    Pipelining sync checks will normally have protected us too, unless disabled
+    by configuration. */
+
+    if (receive_smtp_buffered())
+      {
+      DEBUG(D_any)
+        debug_printf("Non-empty input buffer after STARTTLS; naive attack?");
+      if (tls_active < 0)
+        smtp_inend = smtp_inptr = smtp_inbuffer;
+      /* and if TLS is already active, tls_server_start() should fail */
+      }
+
     /* Attempt to start up a TLS session, and if successful, discard all
     knowledge that was obtained previously. At least, that's what the RFC says,
     and that's what happens by default. However, in order to work round YAEB,

Places

File da80c2a8ed49427334af613c00df65ae301cacdd.patch of Package exim.import4604

Places