From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Cc: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] xfrm: fix integer overflow in xfrm_replay_state_esn_len()
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 12:39:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250122123936.GB390877@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <018ecf13-e371-4b39-8946-c7510baf916b@stanley.mountain>
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:16:01PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The problem is that "replay_esn->bmp_len" comes from the user and it's
> a u32. The xfrm_replay_state_esn_len() function also returns a u32.
> So if we choose a ->bmp_len which very high then the total will be
> more than UINT_MAX and value will be truncated when we return. The
> returned value will be smaller than expected causing problems in the
> caller.
>
> To fix this:
> 1) Use size_add() and size_mul(). This change is necessary for 32bit
> systems.
> 2) Change the type of xfrm_replay_state_esn_len() and related variables
> from u32 to size_t.
> 3) Remove the casts to (int). The size should never be negative.
> Generally, values which come from size_add/mul() should stay as type
> size_t and not be truncated to user fewer than all the bytes in a
> unsigned long.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Fixes: 9736acf395d3 ("xfrm: Add basic infrastructure to support IPsec extended sequence numbers")
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
> ---
> The one caller that I didn't modify was xfrm_sa_len(). That's a bit
> complicated and also I'm kind of hoping that we don't handle user
> controlled data in that function? The place where we definitely are
> handling user data is in xfrm_alloc_replay_state_esn() and this patch
> fixes that.
Yes, that is a bit "complex".
FWIIW, my opinion is that your patch is correct and it improves things -
even if the end result may still have imperfections. And for that reason
I'm in favour of it being accepted.
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-22 12:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-21 11:16 [PATCH net] xfrm: fix integer overflow in xfrm_replay_state_esn_len() Dan Carpenter
2025-01-22 12:39 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2025-01-22 13:16 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-01-22 13:50 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-01-22 16:53 ` kernel test robot
2025-01-30 8:16 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-01-31 20:28 ` kernel test robot
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=20250122123936.GB390877@kernel.org \
--to=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox