From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
M Chetan Kumar <m.chetan.kumar@linux.intel.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Florian Klink <flokli@flokli.de>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: iosm: detected field-spanning write for XMM7360
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 12:32:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202306201148.716CFF3@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0826b484-8bbc-d58f-2caf-7015bd30f827@leemhuis.info>
[regressions list to Bcc]
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:12:40AM +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 20.06.23 10:44, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
> [...]
> >> [Sa Jun 17 20:10:09 2023] memcpy: detected field-spanning write (size 16) of single field "&adth->dg" at drivers/net/wwan/iosm/iosm_ipc_mux_codec.c:852 (size 8)
> [...]
> > [1]: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217569
This looks like a legitimate bug.
Here are the structures used by drivers/net/wwan/iosm/iosm_ipc_mux_codec.c
leading up to the memcpy() triggering this warning at line 852, with
commentary from me added:
struct mux_adb {
struct sk_buff *dest_skb;
u8 *buf; // <- unbounded array
...
};
/**
* struct mux_adth - Structure of the Aggregated Datagram Table Header.
...
* @dg: datagramm table with variable length // variable length you say? :)
*/
struct mux_adth {
...
struct mux_adth_dg dg; // <- destination of memcpy
};
struct mux_adth_dg {
__le32 datagram_index;
__le16 datagram_length;
u8 service_class;
u8 reserved;
}; // 8 byte structure
static void ipc_mux_ul_encode_adth(struct iosm_mux *ipc_mux,
struct mux_adb *ul_adb, int *out_offset)
{
...
struct mux_adth *adth;
...
// Assignment of fixed-sized structure on an
// unbounded string (i.e. minimum size
// constraint is now defined by structure
// layout, which is a good thing.)
adth = (struct mux_adth *)&ul_adb->buf[offset];
...
// This appears to be preparing for having
// _multiple_ "dg" structs at the end of
// struct mux_adth_dg, not just 1. (And, if so,
// should be using the struct_size(), or really,
// given the later subtraction, the flex_size(),
// helper.)
adth_dg_size = offsetof(struct mux_adth, dg) +
ul_adb->dg_count[i] * sizeof(*dg);
...
adth_dg_size -= offsetof(struct mux_adth, dg);
memcpy(&adth->dg, ul_adb->dg[i], adth_dg_size);
&adth->dg is 8 bytes, so the warning message is correct. However, it
seems like "ul_adb->dg_count[i]" contains a _count_ of "dg" structures
to copy, and, in the reported case, is "2".
The fix appears to be adjusting struct mux_adth with:
- struct mux_adth_dg dg;
+ struct mux_adth_dg dg[];
But, since this is an implicit "1-element array to flexible array"
conversion[1], we need to double-check "sizeof" uses.
I only see 3 cases of sizeof(struct mux_adth). This one removes the
"extra" "dg" element for bounds checking:
if (le16_to_cpu(adth->table_length) < (sizeof(struct mux_adth) -
sizeof(struct mux_adth_dg)))
This one adds it back in after subtracting 1 too many:
nr_of_dg = (le16_to_cpu(adth->table_length) -
sizeof(struct mux_adth) +
sizeof(struct mux_adth_dg)) /
sizeof(struct mux_adth_dg);
As does this one:
nr_of_dg = (le16_to_cpu(adth->table_length) -
sizeof(struct mux_adth) +
sizeof(struct mux_adth_dg)) /
sizeof(struct mux_adth_dg);
So they can be simplified to avoid the extra math.
I'll send a patch...
-Kees
[1] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/79
--
Kees Cook
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-20 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-20 8:44 Fwd: iosm: detected field-spanning write for XMM7360 Bagas Sanjaya
2023-06-20 9:12 ` Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
2023-06-20 12:25 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-06-20 19:32 ` Kees Cook [this message]
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=202306201148.716CFF3@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=bagasdotme@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=flokli@flokli.de \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.chetan.kumar@linux.intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.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.