- fix possible heap corruption in ziplist and listpack resulting by trying to
allocate more than the maximum size of 4GB.
- prevent ziplist (hash and zset) from reaching size of above 1GB, will be
converted to HT encoding, that's not a useful size.
- prevent listpack (stream) from reaching size of above 1GB.
- XADD will start a new listpack if the new record may cause the previous
listpack to grow over 1GB.
- XADD will respond with an error if a single stream record is over 1GB
- List type (ziplist in quicklist) was truncating strings that were over 4GB,
now it'll respond with an error.
- fix possible heap corruption in ziplist and listpack resulting by trying to
allocate more than the maximum size of 4GB.
- prevent ziplist (hash and zset) from reaching size of above 1GB, will be
converted to HT encoding, that's not a useful size.
- prevent listpack (stream) from reaching size of above 1GB.
- XADD will start a new listpack if the new record may cause the previous
listpack to grow over 1GB.
- XADD will respond with an error if a single stream record is over 1GB
- List type (ziplist in quicklist) was truncating strings that were over 4GB,
now it'll respond with an error.
When LUA call our C code, by default, the LUA stack has room for 20
elements. In most cases, this is more than enough but sometimes it's not
and the caller must verify the LUA stack size before he pushes elements.
On 3 places in the code, there was no verification of the LUA stack size.
On specific inputs this missing verification could have lead to invalid
memory write:
1. On 'luaReplyToRedisReply', one might return a nested reply that will
explode the LUA stack.
2. On 'redisProtocolToLuaType', the Redis reply might be deep enough
to explode the LUA stack (notice that currently there is no such
command in Redis that returns such a nested reply, but modules might
do it)
3. On 'ldbRedis', one might give a command with enough arguments to
explode the LUA stack (all the arguments will be pushed to the LUA
stack)
This commit is solving all those 3 issues by calling 'lua_checkstack' and
verify that there is enough room in the LUA stack to push elements. In
case 'lua_checkstack' returns an error (there is not enough room in the
LUA stack and it's not possible to increase the stack), we will do the
following:
1. On 'luaReplyToRedisReply', we will return an error to the user.
2. On 'redisProtocolToLuaType' we will exit with panic (we assume this
scenario is rare because it can only happen with a module).
3. On 'ldbRedis', we return an error.
When LUA call our C code, by default, the LUA stack has room for 20
elements. In most cases, this is more than enough but sometimes it's not
and the caller must verify the LUA stack size before he pushes elements.
On 3 places in the code, there was no verification of the LUA stack size.
On specific inputs this missing verification could have lead to invalid
memory write:
1. On 'luaReplyToRedisReply', one might return a nested reply that will
explode the LUA stack.
2. On 'redisProtocolToLuaType', the Redis reply might be deep enough
to explode the LUA stack (notice that currently there is no such
command in Redis that returns such a nested reply, but modules might
do it)
3. On 'ldbRedis', one might give a command with enough arguments to
explode the LUA stack (all the arguments will be pushed to the LUA
stack)
This commit is solving all those 3 issues by calling 'lua_checkstack' and
verify that there is enough room in the LUA stack to push elements. In
case 'lua_checkstack' returns an error (there is not enough room in the
LUA stack and it's not possible to increase the stack), we will do the
following:
1. On 'luaReplyToRedisReply', we will return an error to the user.
2. On 'redisProtocolToLuaType' we will exit with panic (we assume this
scenario is rare because it can only happen with a module).
3. On 'ldbRedis', we return an error.
The protocol parsing on 'ldbReplParseCommand' (LUA debugging)
Assumed protocol correctness. This means that if the following
is given:
*1
$100
test
The parser will try to read additional 94 unallocated bytes after
the client buffer.
This commit fixes this issue by validating that there are actually enough
bytes to read. It also limits the amount of data that can be sent by
the debugger client to 1M so the client will not be able to explode
the memory.
The protocol parsing on 'ldbReplParseCommand' (LUA debugging)
Assumed protocol correctness. This means that if the following
is given:
*1
$100
test
The parser will try to read additional 94 unallocated bytes after
the client buffer.
This commit fixes this issue by validating that there are actually enough
bytes to read. It also limits the amount of data that can be sent by
the debugger client to 1M so the client will not be able to explode
the memory.
This change sets a low limit for multibulk and bulk length in the
protocol for unauthenticated connections, so that they can't easily
cause redis to allocate massive amounts of memory by sending just a few
characters on the network.
The new limits are 10 arguments of 16kb each (instead of 1m of 512mb)
This change sets a low limit for multibulk and bulk length in the
protocol for unauthenticated connections, so that they can't easily
cause redis to allocate massive amounts of memory by sending just a few
characters on the network.
The new limits are 10 arguments of 16kb each (instead of 1m of 512mb)
The redis-cli command line tool and redis-sentinel service may be vulnerable
to integer overflow when parsing specially crafted large multi-bulk network
replies. This is a result of a vulnerability in the underlying hiredis
library which does not perform an overflow check before calling the calloc()
heap allocation function.
This issue only impacts systems with heap allocators that do not perform their
own overflow checks. Most modern systems do and are therefore not likely to
be affected. Furthermore, by default redis-sentinel uses the jemalloc allocator
which is also not vulnerable.
The redis-cli command line tool and redis-sentinel service may be vulnerable
to integer overflow when parsing specially crafted large multi-bulk network
replies. This is a result of a vulnerability in the underlying hiredis
library which does not perform an overflow check before calling the calloc()
heap allocation function.
This issue only impacts systems with heap allocators that do not perform their
own overflow checks. Most modern systems do and are therefore not likely to
be affected. Furthermore, by default redis-sentinel uses the jemalloc allocator
which is also not vulnerable.
The vulnerability involves changing the default set-max-intset-entries
configuration parameter to a very large value and constructing specially
crafted commands to manipulate sets
The vulnerability involves changing the default set-max-intset-entries
configuration parameter to a very large value and constructing specially
crafted commands to manipulate sets
