All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Tomas Bortoli <tomasbortoli@gmail.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
	Jaganath Kanakkassery <jaganath.k.os@gmail.com>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
	linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_event: potential out of bounds parsing ADV events
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 06:32:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190401063215.GC32590@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2a2b63a-c5f0-5d03-7516-668df6049c95@gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:44:29PM +0100, Tomas Bortoli wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> sorry for the multiple emails but I have checked again the code and
> looks like process_adv_report() reads from ev->data for a size of
> ev->length.
> 
> I attach a patch that applies the bound check to both
> hci_le_ext_adv_report_evt() and hci_le_adv_report_evt().
> 

You're right that both need to be fixed.

> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> index 609fd6871c5a..275926e0753e 100644
> --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> @@ -5345,6 +5345,7 @@ static void hci_le_adv_report_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
>  {
>  	u8 num_reports = skb->data[0];
>  	void *ptr = &skb->data[1];
> +	u8 *end = &skb->data[skb->len - 1];
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  
>  	hci_dev_lock(hdev);
>  
> @@ -5352,6 +5353,9 @@ static void hci_le_adv_report_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
>  		struct hci_ev_le_advertising_info *ev = ptr;
>  		s8 rssi;
>  
> +		if (ev->data + ev->length > end)

No, this isn't right.  You've removed the + 1 and you've introduced an
additional "sbk->len - 1" so we're off by two...  The test is supposed
to be:

	start + length_read > start + length_of_buffer

So the end has to be &skb->data[skb->len].  The "+ 1" comes from later
in the function when we do:

		ptr += sizeof(*ev) + ev->length + 1;
                                               ^^^^

I don't where the "+ 1" comes from, but I know the condition and the
increment should match.  We could use ev->data instead of
"ptr + sizeof(*ev)" but to me, because the mysterious "+ 1" then it
seems more readable to match the increment exactly...

regards,
dan carpenter

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Tomas Bortoli <tomasbortoli@gmail.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
	Jaganath Kanakkassery <jaganath.k.os@gmail.com>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
	linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_event: potential out of bounds parsing ADV events
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 09:32:15 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190401063215.GC32590@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2a2b63a-c5f0-5d03-7516-668df6049c95@gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:44:29PM +0100, Tomas Bortoli wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> sorry for the multiple emails but I have checked again the code and
> looks like process_adv_report() reads from ev->data for a size of
> ev->length.
> 
> I attach a patch that applies the bound check to both
> hci_le_ext_adv_report_evt() and hci_le_adv_report_evt().
> 

You're right that both need to be fixed.

> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> index 609fd6871c5a..275926e0753e 100644
> --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> @@ -5345,6 +5345,7 @@ static void hci_le_adv_report_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
>  {
>  	u8 num_reports = skb->data[0];
>  	void *ptr = &skb->data[1];
> +	u8 *end = &skb->data[skb->len - 1];
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  
>  	hci_dev_lock(hdev);
>  
> @@ -5352,6 +5353,9 @@ static void hci_le_adv_report_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
>  		struct hci_ev_le_advertising_info *ev = ptr;
>  		s8 rssi;
>  
> +		if (ev->data + ev->length > end)

No, this isn't right.  You've removed the + 1 and you've introduced an
additional "sbk->len - 1" so we're off by two...  The test is supposed
to be:

	start + length_read > start + length_of_buffer

So the end has to be &skb->data[skb->len].  The "+ 1" comes from later
in the function when we do:

		ptr += sizeof(*ev) + ev->length + 1;
                                               ^^^^

I don't where the "+ 1" comes from, but I know the condition and the
increment should match.  We could use ev->data instead of
"ptr + sizeof(*ev)" but to me, because the mysterious "+ 1" then it
seems more readable to match the increment exactly...

regards,
dan carpenter


  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-01  6:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-30  7:25 [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_event: potential out of bounds parsing ADV events Dan Carpenter
2019-03-30  7:25 ` Dan Carpenter
2019-03-30  9:20 ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-03-30  9:20   ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-03-30 22:44   ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-03-30 22:44     ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-01  6:32     ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2019-04-01  6:32       ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-01 17:24       ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-01 17:24         ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-01 17:41         ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-01 17:41           ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-03  6:54         ` Jaganath K
2019-04-03  6:55           ` Jaganath K
2019-04-01 18:03   ` Cong Wang
2019-04-01 18:03     ` Cong Wang
2019-04-02  6:33     ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-02  6:33       ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-02 17:42       ` Cong Wang
2019-04-02 17:42         ` Cong Wang
2019-04-02 18:46         ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-02 18:46           ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-02 19:55         ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-02 19:55           ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-03 22:55           ` Cong Wang
2019-04-03 22:55             ` Cong Wang
2019-04-04  8:06             ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-04  8:06               ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-05 17:16               ` Cong Wang
2019-04-05 17:16                 ` Cong Wang
2019-04-05 20:48                 ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-05 20:48                   ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-05 21:05                   ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-05 21:05                     ` Tomas Bortoli
2019-04-05 21:14                     ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-05 21:14                       ` Dan Carpenter
     [not found]                       ` <CAAHj5qj3PciY8ngqSGzH3=TQcm5vCghb0Z_0Y3DFQjTLMUM-9Q@mail.gmail.com>
2019-04-05 21:23                         ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-05 21:23                           ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-02 20:13         ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-02 20:13           ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-03 22:51           ` Cong Wang
2019-04-03 22:51             ` Cong Wang
2019-04-04  6:35             ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-04  6:35               ` Dan Carpenter
2019-04-05 16:28               ` Cong Wang
2019-04-05 16:28                 ` Cong Wang

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=20190401063215.GC32590@kadam \
    --to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
    --cc=jaganath.k.os@gmail.com \
    --cc=johan.hedberg@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
    --cc=tomasbortoli@gmail.com \
    /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.