From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: matvejchikov@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
corbet@lwn.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "lib/cmdline.c: fix get_options() overflow while parsing ranges" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 08:15:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1498457754218154@kroah.com> (raw)
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
lib/cmdline.c: fix get_options() overflow while parsing ranges
to the 4.9-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
lib-cmdline.c-fix-get_options-overflow-while-parsing-ranges.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.9 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>From a91e0f680bcd9e10c253ae8b62462a38bd48f09f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilya Matveychikov <matvejchikov@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:08:49 -0700
Subject: lib/cmdline.c: fix get_options() overflow while parsing ranges
From: Ilya Matveychikov <matvejchikov@gmail.com>
commit a91e0f680bcd9e10c253ae8b62462a38bd48f09f upstream.
When using get_options() it's possible to specify a range of numbers,
like 1-100500. The problem is that it doesn't track array size while
calling internally to get_range() which iterates over the range and
fills the memory with numbers.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/2613C75C-B04D-4BFF-82A6-12F97BA0F620@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ilya V. Matveychikov <matvejchikov@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
lib/cmdline.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- a/lib/cmdline.c
+++ b/lib/cmdline.c
@@ -22,14 +22,14 @@
* the values[M, M+1, ..., N] into the ints array in get_options.
*/
-static int get_range(char **str, int *pint)
+static int get_range(char **str, int *pint, int n)
{
int x, inc_counter, upper_range;
(*str)++;
upper_range = simple_strtol((*str), NULL, 0);
inc_counter = upper_range - *pint;
- for (x = *pint; x < upper_range; x++)
+ for (x = *pint; n && x < upper_range; x++, n--)
*pint++ = x;
return inc_counter;
}
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ char *get_options(const char *str, int n
break;
if (res == 3) {
int range_nums;
- range_nums = get_range((char **)&str, ints + i);
+ range_nums = get_range((char **)&str, ints + i, nints - i);
if (range_nums < 0)
break;
/*
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from matvejchikov@gmail.com are
queue-4.9/lib-cmdline.c-fix-get_options-overflow-while-parsing-ranges.patch
reply other threads:[~2017-06-26 7:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1498457754218154@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=matvejchikov@gmail.com \
--cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.