From: Sean Young <sean@mess.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: rc: validate that "rc_proto" is reasonable
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2020 11:04:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201101110452.GA8281@gofer.mess.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201030115230.GF3251003@mwanda>
Hi Dan,
On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 02:52:30PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Smatch complains that "rc_proto" comes from the user and it can result
> in shift wrapping in ir_raw_encode_scancode()
>
> drivers/media/rc/rc-ir-raw.c:526 ir_raw_encode_scancode()
> error: undefined (user controlled) shift '1 << protocol'
>
> This is true, but I reviewed the surrounding code and it appears
> harmless. Anyway, let's verify that "rc_proto" is valid as a kernel
> hardenning measure.
It would mean that suddenly an invalid rc proto could become valid; also
like you say, this is a good hardening measure.
Good catch, thank you.
Regards,
Sean
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> ---
> drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c | 3 ++-
> include/uapi/linux/lirc.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h b/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h
> index f99d9dcae667..c1eb960adde3 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h
> @@ -226,6 +226,7 @@ enum rc_proto {
> RC_PROTO_RCMM24 = 25,
> RC_PROTO_RCMM32 = 26,
> RC_PROTO_XBOX_DVD = 27,
> + RC_PROTO_MAX = RC_PROTO_XBOX_DVD,
> };
>
> #endif
> diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c b/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c
> index 220363b9a868..116daf90c858 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c
> @@ -263,7 +263,8 @@ static ssize_t lirc_transmit(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> goto out_unlock;
> }
>
> - if (scan.flags || scan.keycode || scan.timestamp) {
> + if (scan.flags || scan.keycode || scan.timestamp ||
> + scan.rc_proto > RC_PROTO_MAX) {
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> --
> 2.28.0
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Young <sean@mess.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: rc: validate that "rc_proto" is reasonable
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 11:04:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201101110452.GA8281@gofer.mess.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201030115230.GF3251003@mwanda>
Hi Dan,
On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 02:52:30PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Smatch complains that "rc_proto" comes from the user and it can result
> in shift wrapping in ir_raw_encode_scancode()
>
> drivers/media/rc/rc-ir-raw.c:526 ir_raw_encode_scancode()
> error: undefined (user controlled) shift '1 << protocol'
>
> This is true, but I reviewed the surrounding code and it appears
> harmless. Anyway, let's verify that "rc_proto" is valid as a kernel
> hardenning measure.
It would mean that suddenly an invalid rc proto could become valid; also
like you say, this is a good hardening measure.
Good catch, thank you.
Regards,
Sean
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> ---
> drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c | 3 ++-
> include/uapi/linux/lirc.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h b/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h
> index f99d9dcae667..c1eb960adde3 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/lirc.h
> @@ -226,6 +226,7 @@ enum rc_proto {
> RC_PROTO_RCMM24 = 25,
> RC_PROTO_RCMM32 = 26,
> RC_PROTO_XBOX_DVD = 27,
> + RC_PROTO_MAX = RC_PROTO_XBOX_DVD,
> };
>
> #endif
> diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c b/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c
> index 220363b9a868..116daf90c858 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/rc/lirc_dev.c
> @@ -263,7 +263,8 @@ static ssize_t lirc_transmit(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> goto out_unlock;
> }
>
> - if (scan.flags || scan.keycode || scan.timestamp) {
> + if (scan.flags || scan.keycode || scan.timestamp ||
> + scan.rc_proto > RC_PROTO_MAX) {
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> --
> 2.28.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-01 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-30 11:52 [PATCH] media: rc: validate that "rc_proto" is reasonable Dan Carpenter
2020-10-30 11:52 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-11-01 11:04 ` Sean Young [this message]
2020-11-01 11:04 ` Sean Young
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=20201101110452.GA8281@gofer.mess.org \
--to=sean@mess.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.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.