From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 29 14:31:14 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E23E472
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:31:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.in-addr.com (mail.in-addr.com
 [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:61e8::2525:2525])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EC19106
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:31:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from gjp by mail.in-addr.com with local (Exim 4.85 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <gpalmer@freebsd.org>)
 id 1YGq7j-0007Ki-Bv; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:31:11 +0000
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:31:11 +0000
From: Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org>
To: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-15:02.kmem
Message-ID: <20150129143111.GA29167@in-addr.com>
References: <mailman.92.1422446402.71362.freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
 <20150128194011.2175B19F@hub.freebsd.org>
 <20150128211910.80082283DA18@rock.dv.isc.org>
 <54C966BF.9000803@rewt.org.uk> <54C9837C.8090704@akips.com>
 <CAKE2PDsC8dvx23H5DZ_b90F7PmPr3LB8kyw68SbuHgF4Hb+nkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150130011402.P36378@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150130011402.P36378@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gpalmer@freebsd.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.in-addr.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, Nick Frampton <nick.frampton@akips.com>,
 jungle Boogie <jungleboogie0@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:31:14 -0000

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 01:20:56AM +1100, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 17:01:50 -0800, jungle Boogie wrote:
>  > Hi Nick,
>  > On Jan 28, 2015 4:56 PM, "Nick Frampton" <nick.frampton@akips.com> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > On 29/01/15 08:46, Joe Holden wrote:
>  > >>
>  > >> Really, how many SCTP users are there om the wild... maybe one?
>  > >>
>  > >> It shouldn't be in GENERIC at the very least!
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > We use Netflow over SCTP in our network monitoring product, so it would
>  > be a pain to have to build a custom kernel.
>  > 
>  > But also a pain to have an exploit when it could be prevented.
> 
> Are you vulnerable to an SCTP exploit if you're not using SCTP?

>From one of the advisories (FreeBSD-SA-15:02.kmem):

-- QUOTE --
An unprivileged process can read or modify 16-bits of memory which              
belongs to the kernel.  This smay lead to exposure of sensitive                 
information or allow privilege escalation.                                      
-- ENDQUOTE --

So even if you don't use SCTP, if someone got a shell on your box
they could potentially use SCTP to get root or modify kernel memory
to break out of a jail, etc.

In other words, you don't necessarily need to use SCTP to be affected
by vulnerabilities in it.

Regards,

Gary