* [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_intel: prevent reads beyond the end of skb->data
@ 2021-05-27 13:03 Dan Carpenter
2021-05-27 15:19 ` Marcel Holtmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2021-05-27 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcel Holtmann, Loic Poulain, Luiz Augusto von Dentz
Cc: Johan Hedberg, Loic Poulain, linux-bluetooth, kernel-janitors
There doesn't appear to be any checks to ensure that skb->data is large
enough in these functions. For most of these, if we specify a header
length, then h4_recv_buf() will ensure that all packets are at least the
minimum length. The intel_recv_lpm() function needs an additional
check for LPM_OP_TX_NOTIFY packets.
Fixes: ca93cee5a56e ("Bluetooth: hci_uart: Add basic support for Intel Lightning Peak devices")
No signed-off-by because I can't test this and just wanted to collect
feedback. This is part of a static checker warning because someone
reported the hci_event.c read overflows to security@kernel.org. This
stuff is quite complicated for static checkers of course and I don't
understand all the rules yet. Right now I have about 2000 warnings
that look like this:
drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:877 intel_recv_event() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '2' bytes
drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:922 intel_recv_lpm() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '2' bytes
drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:1028 intel_dequeue() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '3' bytes
I think there should be a different additional static checker warning
for h4_recv_pkt structs like in this patch if you fail to specify a
.hlen value?
regards,
dan carpenter
---
drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c
index 7249b91d9b91..3e4bccacad9b 100644
--- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c
+++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c
@@ -925,7 +925,7 @@ static int intel_recv_lpm(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
switch (lpm->opcode) {
case LPM_OP_TX_NOTIFY:
- if (lpm->dlen < 1) {
+ if (lpm->dlen < 1 || skb->len < struct_size(lpm, data, 1)) {
bt_dev_err(hu->hdev, "Invalid LPM notification packet");
break;
}
@@ -959,10 +959,10 @@ static int intel_recv_lpm(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
.maxlen = HCI_LPM_MAX_SIZE
static const struct h4_recv_pkt intel_recv_pkts[] = {
- { H4_RECV_ACL, .recv = hci_recv_frame },
- { H4_RECV_SCO, .recv = hci_recv_frame },
- { H4_RECV_EVENT, .recv = intel_recv_event },
- { INTEL_RECV_LPM, .recv = intel_recv_lpm },
+ { H4_RECV_ACL, .recv = hci_recv_frame, .hlen = sizeof(struct bt_skb_cb) },
+ { H4_RECV_SCO, .recv = hci_recv_frame, .hlen = sizeof(struct bt_skb_cb) },
+ { H4_RECV_EVENT, .recv = intel_recv_event, .hlen = sizeof(struct hci_event_hdr) },
+ { INTEL_RECV_LPM, .recv = intel_recv_lpm, .hlen = sizeof(struct hci_lpm_pkt) },
};
static int intel_recv(struct hci_uart *hu, const void *data, int count)
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_intel: prevent reads beyond the end of skb->data
2021-05-27 13:03 [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_intel: prevent reads beyond the end of skb->data Dan Carpenter
@ 2021-05-27 15:19 ` Marcel Holtmann
2021-05-27 16:49 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Marcel Holtmann @ 2021-05-27 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Loic Poulain, Luiz Augusto von Dentz, Johan Hedberg,
linux-bluetooth, kernel-janitors
Hi Dan,
> There doesn't appear to be any checks to ensure that skb->data is large
> enough in these functions. For most of these, if we specify a header
> length, then h4_recv_buf() will ensure that all packets are at least the
> minimum length. The intel_recv_lpm() function needs an additional
> check for LPM_OP_TX_NOTIFY packets.
>
> Fixes: ca93cee5a56e ("Bluetooth: hci_uart: Add basic support for Intel Lightning Peak devices")
>
> No signed-off-by because I can't test this and just wanted to collect
> feedback. This is part of a static checker warning because someone
> reported the hci_event.c read overflows to security@kernel.org. This
> stuff is quite complicated for static checkers of course and I don't
> understand all the rules yet. Right now I have about 2000 warnings
> that look like this:
>
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:877 intel_recv_event() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '2' bytes
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:922 intel_recv_lpm() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '2' bytes
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:1028 intel_dequeue() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '3' bytes
I think it will be hard to find people with this hardware. LnP devices are rare, but maybe someone will speak up here.
>
> I think there should be a different additional static checker warning
> for h4_recv_pkt structs like in this patch if you fail to specify a
> .hlen value?
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> ---
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c
> index 7249b91d9b91..3e4bccacad9b 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c
> @@ -925,7 +925,7 @@ static int intel_recv_lpm(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
>
> switch (lpm->opcode) {
> case LPM_OP_TX_NOTIFY:
> - if (lpm->dlen < 1) {
> + if (lpm->dlen < 1 || skb->len < struct_size(lpm, data, 1)) {
> bt_dev_err(hu->hdev, "Invalid LPM notification packet");
> break;
> }
This change looks fine to me and I would accept a patch for it.
> @@ -959,10 +959,10 @@ static int intel_recv_lpm(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
> .maxlen = HCI_LPM_MAX_SIZE
>
> static const struct h4_recv_pkt intel_recv_pkts[] = {
> - { H4_RECV_ACL, .recv = hci_recv_frame },
> - { H4_RECV_SCO, .recv = hci_recv_frame },
> - { H4_RECV_EVENT, .recv = intel_recv_event },
> - { INTEL_RECV_LPM, .recv = intel_recv_lpm },
> + { H4_RECV_ACL, .recv = hci_recv_frame, .hlen = sizeof(struct bt_skb_cb) },
> + { H4_RECV_SCO, .recv = hci_recv_frame, .hlen = sizeof(struct bt_skb_cb) },
> + { H4_RECV_EVENT, .recv = intel_recv_event, .hlen = sizeof(struct hci_event_hdr) },
> + { INTEL_RECV_LPM, .recv = intel_recv_lpm, .hlen = sizeof(struct hci_lpm_pkt) },
This part I do not understand, all the H4_RECV_* and even INTEL_RECV_* provide the hlen. So I have no idea what your change is doing here. And the two for H4_RECV_{ACL,SCO} are actually wrong. In case you wonder this is how they are defined:
#define H4_RECV_ACL \
.type = HCI_ACLDATA_PKT, \
.hlen = HCI_ACL_HDR_SIZE, \
.loff = 2, \
.lsize = 2, \
.maxlen = HCI_MAX_FRAME_SIZE \
#define H4_RECV_SCO \
.type = HCI_SCODATA_PKT, \
.hlen = HCI_SCO_HDR_SIZE, \
.loff = 2, \
.lsize = 1, \
.maxlen = HCI_MAX_SCO_SIZE
#define H4_RECV_EVENT \
.type = HCI_EVENT_PKT, \
.hlen = HCI_EVENT_HDR_SIZE, \
.loff = 1, \
.lsize = 1, \
.maxlen = HCI_MAX_EVENT_SIZE
Regards
Marcel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_intel: prevent reads beyond the end of skb->data
2021-05-27 15:19 ` Marcel Holtmann
@ 2021-05-27 16:49 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2021-05-27 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcel Holtmann
Cc: Loic Poulain, Luiz Augusto von Dentz, Johan Hedberg,
linux-bluetooth, kernel-janitors
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 05:19:04PM +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> > There doesn't appear to be any checks to ensure that skb->data is large
> > enough in these functions. For most of these, if we specify a header
> > length, then h4_recv_buf() will ensure that all packets are at least the
> > minimum length. The intel_recv_lpm() function needs an additional
> > check for LPM_OP_TX_NOTIFY packets.
> >
> > Fixes: ca93cee5a56e ("Bluetooth: hci_uart: Add basic support for Intel Lightning Peak devices")
> >
> > No signed-off-by because I can't test this and just wanted to collect
> > feedback. This is part of a static checker warning because someone
> > reported the hci_event.c read overflows to security@kernel.org. This
> > stuff is quite complicated for static checkers of course and I don't
> > understand all the rules yet. Right now I have about 2000 warnings
> > that look like this:
> >
> > drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:877 intel_recv_event() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '2' bytes
> > drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:922 intel_recv_lpm() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '2' bytes
> > drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:1028 intel_dequeue() warn: assignment assumes 'skb->len' is '3' bytes
>
> I think it will be hard to find people with this hardware. LnP devices are rare, but maybe someone will speak up here.
>
It's easier to fix all the bugs than it is to try figure out if anyone
has the hardware. Plus if no one has the hardware then I will get the
credit for fixing a security bug with none of the risk of breaking
someone's system. ;)
[ snip ]
> > + { H4_RECV_ACL, .recv = hci_recv_frame, .hlen = sizeof(struct bt_skb_cb) },
> > + { H4_RECV_SCO, .recv = hci_recv_frame, .hlen = sizeof(struct bt_skb_cb) },
> > + { H4_RECV_EVENT, .recv = intel_recv_event, .hlen = sizeof(struct hci_event_hdr) },
> > + { INTEL_RECV_LPM, .recv = intel_recv_lpm, .hlen = sizeof(struct hci_lpm_pkt) },
>
> This part I do not understand, all the H4_RECV_* and even INTEL_RECV_* provide the hlen. So I have no idea what your change is doing here. And the two for H4_RECV_{ACL,SCO} are actually wrong. In case you wonder this is how they are defined:
>
> #define H4_RECV_ACL \
> .type = HCI_ACLDATA_PKT, \
> .hlen = HCI_ACL_HDR_SIZE, \
> .loff = 2, \
> .lsize = 2, \
> .maxlen = HCI_MAX_FRAME_SIZE \
>
> #define H4_RECV_SCO \
> .type = HCI_SCODATA_PKT, \
> .hlen = HCI_SCO_HDR_SIZE, \
> .loff = 2, \
> .lsize = 1, \
> .maxlen = HCI_MAX_SCO_SIZE
>
> #define H4_RECV_EVENT \
> .type = HCI_EVENT_PKT, \
> .hlen = HCI_EVENT_HDR_SIZE, \
> .loff = 1, \
> .lsize = 1, \
> .maxlen = HCI_MAX_EVENT_SIZE
Oh... Crap... I've been banging my head into the wall trying to figure
out why I couldn't make Smatch generate a warning for this. But now
when I remove the macro it does.
drivers/bluetooth/hci_intel.c:961 (null)() struct member not set 'intel_recv_pkts[0]->hlen'
It's embarrassing how long I have spend trying to figure out why it
said it was already initialized to non-zero...
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-27 16:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-05-27 13:03 [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_intel: prevent reads beyond the end of skb->data Dan Carpenter
2021-05-27 15:19 ` Marcel Holtmann
2021-05-27 16:49 ` Dan Carpenter
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox