Re: [PATCH] Input: iforce - bound the device-reported force-feedback effect index

[Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Jun 13, 2026 at 09:58:55PM -0500, Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Bryam Vargas <hexlabsecurity@proton.me>
> 
> iforce_process_packet() handles a status report (packet id 0x02) by
> taking a force-feedback effect index straight from the device wire and
> using it to address the per-effect state array:
> 
> 	i = data[1] & 0x7f;
> 	if (data[1] & 0x80) {
> 		if (!test_and_set_bit(FF_CORE_IS_PLAYED,
> 				      iforce->core_effects[i].flags))
> 			...
> 	} else if (test_and_clear_bit(FF_CORE_IS_PLAYED,
> 				      iforce->core_effects[i].flags)) {
> 		...
> 	}
> 
> The index is masked only with 0x7f, so it ranges 0..127, but
> core_effects[] holds only IFORCE_EFFECTS_MAX (32) entries.  For an index
> of 32..127 the test_and_set_bit()/test_and_clear_bit() is an
> out-of-bounds single-bit read-modify-write past the array.  core_effects[]
> is the second-to-last member of struct iforce, so the write lands in the
> trailing members and beyond the embedding kzalloc()'d iforce_serio /
> iforce_usb object.
> 
> data[1] is unvalidated device payload on both transports (the USB
> interrupt endpoint and serio), and the status path is not gated on force
> feedback being present, so a malicious or counterfeit device can set or
> clear a bit at an attacker-chosen offset past the object.
> 
> Reject an out-of-range index instead of indexing with it.  Bound against
> the array dimension IFORCE_EFFECTS_MAX rather than dev->ff->max_effects so
> the check guarantees memory safety regardless of how many effects the
> device registered.  A legitimate "effect started/stopped" status always
> carries an index below IFORCE_EFFECTS_MAX, so well-formed devices are
> unaffected; the neighbouring mark_core_as_ready() loop is already bounded
> and is left untouched.
> 
> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Bryam Vargas <hexlabsecurity@proton.me>

Thank you, applied (but I dropped the temporary 'flags').

-- 
Dmitry