Linux s390 Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>
To: Harald Freudenberger <freude@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: dengler@linux.ibm.com, fcallies@linux.ibm.com,
	ifranzki@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/1] Improve zcrypt reply message verification checks
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2026 01:06:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ttkeg7b@ub.hpns> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260807101918.31482-1-freude@linux.ibm.com>

On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 12:19:17PM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote:
> Add or improve checks related to buffer sizes and reply sizes to the
> handling of replies from the crypto cards for CCA, EP11 (AP message
> type 6) and ICA (AP type 50) messages. The verification code related
> to reply field length was not designed well and thus firmware
> deficiencies could lead to unexpected behavior in the zcrypt device
> driver. Thus improve the code to more closely inspect especially
> length fields at message replies.
> 
> Rework zcrypt_msgtype6_receive(), zcrypt_msgtype6_receive_ep11() and
> zcrypt_msgtype50_receive() to validate reply lengths more carefully
> before copying data back into the request buffer. Use size_t for
> length calculations, reject inconsistent reply sizes, and add
> defensive handling for short invalid replies. For XCRB replies,
> validate both reply segments and derive the effective message length
> from the covered range instead of trusting only the second segment.
> 
> Changelog:
> v1 - initial patch
> v2 - fixed typo in header check_for_overflow -> check_add_overflow.
> v3 - rephrased and smoothed subject and text of the patch. It is now
>      "s390/zcrypt: Improve zcrypt reply message verification checks"
>      and the text does not talk about malicious cards any more.
>      Updated Reviewed-by tags
> v4 - As sashiko clearly states the addition of two 32 bit values can
>      mathematically never overflow a 64 bit value and thus the
>      check_add_overflow() was total overkill - removed.
> v5 - Sashiko had a by-catch related to the very same fields. Under
>      some circumstances the fields count1 and offset1 of the CPRB
>      where not checked but used for a memcpy to userspace. So again a
>      rework of the check of these x86 header fields in the receiving
>      function before the CPRB is processed to be copied in parts to
>      userspace. Removed all reviewed-by as I want to have another
>      developer look onto this patch again.
> v6 - Again reworked and re-structured the code. As the very same
>      pattern appears with message type 50 also reworked the receive
>      function there.
> v7 - Reworked the debug messages based on feedback from Finn. These
>      messages should be real debug messages (so use pr_debug) as the
>      intended consumer is a developer. Thus the somehow cryptic debug
>      message text. Picked Finn's suggestion to avoid hard coded ERRNO
>      message strings and use %d with the real rc instead.
> 
> Harald Freudenberger (1):
>   s390/zcrypt: Improve zcrypt reply message verification checks
> 
>  drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_msgtype50.c |  39 ++++---
>  drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_msgtype6.c  | 149 ++++++++++++++++---------
>  2 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)

Applied, thank you!

      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-26 23:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-07 10:19 [PATCH v7 0/1] Improve zcrypt reply message verification checks Harald Freudenberger
2026-08-07 10:19 ` [PATCH v7 1/1] s390/zcrypt: " Harald Freudenberger
2026-08-07 10:34   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-25 14:24   ` Finn Callies
2026-08-26 23:06 ` Vasily Gorbik [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=ttkeg7b@ub.hpns \
    --to=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=dengler@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=fcallies@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=freude@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=ifranzki@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-s390@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox