From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: "Len Baker" <len.baker@gmx.com>,
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Lee Jones" <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
"Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Joe Perches" <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/input: Remove all strcpy() uses in favor of strscpy()
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 09:17:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202108020913.2FB270539C@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YQbXiwie4YPzPWKK@google.com>
On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 10:19:07AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 09:44:33AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 05:57:32PM +0200, Len Baker wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 04:00:00PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 04:43:16PM +0200, Len Baker wrote:
> > > > > strcpy() performs no bounds checking on the destination buffer. This
> > > > > could result in linear overflows beyond the end of the buffer, leading
> > > > > to all kinds of misbehaviors. The safe replacement is strscpy().
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Len Baker <len.baker@gmx.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > This is a task of the KSPP [1]
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88
> > > > >
> > > > > drivers/input/keyboard/locomokbd.c | 2 +-
> > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/locomokbd.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/locomokbd.c
> > > > > index dae053596572..dbb3dc48df12 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/locomokbd.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/locomokbd.c
> > > > > @@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ static int locomokbd_probe(struct locomo_dev *dev)
> > > > > locomokbd->suspend_jiffies = jiffies;
> > > > >
> > > > > locomokbd->input = input_dev;
> > > > > - strcpy(locomokbd->phys, "locomokbd/input0");
> > > > > + strscpy(locomokbd->phys, "locomokbd/input0", sizeof(locomokbd->phys));
> > > >
> > > > So if the string doesn't fit, it's fine to silently truncate it?
> > >
> > > I think it is better than overflow :)
> > >
> > > > Rather than converting every single strcpy() in the kernel to
> > > > strscpy(), maybe there should be some consideration given to how the
> > > > issue of a strcpy() that overflows the buffer should be handled.
> > > > E.g. in the case of a known string such as the above, if it's longer
> > > > than the destination, should we find a way to make the compiler issue
> > > > a warning at compile time?
> > >
> > > Good point. I am a kernel newbie and have no experience. So this
> > > question should be answered by some kernel hacker :) But I agree
> > > with your proposals.
> > >
> > > Kees and folks: Any comments?
> > >
> > > Note: Kees is asked the same question in [2]
> > >
> > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210731135957.GB1979@titan/
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Sorry for the delay at looking into this. It didn't use to be a problem
> > (there would always have been a compile-time warning generated for
> > known-too-small cases), but that appears to have regressed when,
> > ironically, strscpy() coverage was added. I've detailed it in the bug
> > report:
> > https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88
> >
> > So, bottom line: we need to fix the missing compile-time warnings for
> > strcpy() and strscpy() under CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=y.
>
> Is it possible to have them warn always? Or that would be too many false
> positives?
There are actually no false positives right now (they were all fixed
before FORTIFY_SOURCE landed). Enabling it by default would likely mean
splitting compile-time checks from run-time checks... I'm kind of
already doing this in the recent memcpy() strictness series[1], so ...
maybe?
I think I'd like to land the memcpy() series first, then we can revisit
making it always warn.
> > In the past we'd tried to add a stracpy()[1] that would only work with
> > const string sources. Linus got angry[2] about API explosion, though,
> > so we're mostly faced with doing the strscpy() replacements.
>
> I would like to have an API that would do compile-time checks and
> BUILD_BUG_ON() for a few places in input drivers where we copy constant
> strings. There is no reason to encumber the code with runtime checks,
> and bombing out on compile instead of truncating would be nice.
In theory, this is provided by CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, though a recent
change broke a specific instance. I've added tests for this now to the
memcpy() series, and will get it fixed in there too.
> > Another idea might be to have strcpy() do the "constant strings only"
> > thing, leaving strscpy() for the dynamic lengths.
> >
> > One thing is clear: replacing strlcpy() with strscpy() is probably the
> > easiest and best first step to cleaning up the proliferation of str*()
> > functions.
>
> OK, so the consensus is that we set this patch aside as it does not
> really fix any issues (the strcpy() destination is 32 bytes and is big
> enough to hold the string being copied)?
I think that's fair.
-Kees
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210727205855.411487-1-keescook@chromium.org/
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-02 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-01 14:43 [PATCH] drivers/input: Remove all strcpy() uses in favor of strscpy() Len Baker
2021-08-01 15:00 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2021-08-01 15:57 ` Len Baker
2021-08-01 16:44 ` Kees Cook
2021-08-01 17:19 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2021-08-02 16:17 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2021-08-03 7:07 ` Kees Cook
2021-08-03 7:18 ` Hans Verkuil
2021-08-07 14:02 ` Len Baker
2021-08-07 15:17 ` Joe Perches
2021-08-08 11:30 ` Len Baker
2021-08-01 16:39 ` Joe Perches
2021-08-01 16:55 ` Joe Perches
2021-08-02 16:13 ` Kees Cook
2021-08-02 18:57 ` Joe Perches
2021-08-07 14:10 ` Len Baker
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=202108020913.2FB270539C@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=len.baker@gmx.com \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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.