Linux SCSI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jesse Taube" <jtaubepe@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: qla2xxx: Fix flex array member not at end
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 17:10:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260727171037.0F4351F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260727164842.2123122-1-jtaubepe@redhat.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Missing bounds check on user-provided BSG request length leads to out-of-bounds memory accesses when casting to driver-specific structures.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v4] scsi: qla2xxx: Fix flex array member not at end ---
commit 5047f2de85357d7b297d2d46b642495d4d1e88e7
Author: Jesse Taube <jtaubepe@redhat.com>

scsi: qla2xxx: Fix flex array member not at end

In qla_edif_bsg.h: struct fc_bsg_reply and struct fc_bsg_request have flexible
array members, thus they must be the last member of the parent structure. This
commit puts them inside a union with trailing members padded to silence warnings.

> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif_bsg.h b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif_bsg.h
> index 514c265ba86e2..2b32a31856292 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif_bsg.h
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif_bsg.h
> @@ -36,16 +36,26 @@ struct extra_auth_els {
>  } __packed;
>  
>  struct qla_bsg_auth_els_request {
> -	struct fc_bsg_request r;
> -	struct extra_auth_els e;
> +	union {
> +		struct fc_bsg_request r;
> +		struct {
> +			unsigned char __fc_bsg_request_sz[sizeof(struct fc_bsg_request)];
> +			struct extra_auth_els e;
> +		};
> +	};
>  };

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but while reviewing this structure I noticed a
potential missing bounds check on the user-provided BSG request length.

When a local user with CAP_SYS_RAWIO issues an SG_IO ioctl on the BSG device
with a maliciously small request_len, the BSG core allocates exactly
request_len bytes using memdup_user().

Since the core fc_bsg_host_dispatch calculates the expected cmdlen but never
validates job->request_len against it, could this lead to an out-of-bounds
heap read when casting bsg_job->request to larger structures?

For instance, in drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_bsg.c:qla2x00_process_vendor_specific(),
vendor_cmd[0] is accessed without checking if request_len is sufficiently large:

	ql_dbg(ql_dbg_edif, vha, 0x911b, "%s FC_BSG_HST_VENDOR cmd[0]=0x%x\n",
	    __func__, bsg_request->rqst_data.h_vendor.vendor_cmd[0]);

	switch (bsg_request->rqst_data.h_vendor.vendor_cmd[0]) {

Similarly, in drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c:qla_bsg_check(), the code directly
dereferences req->e.sub_cmd assuming the request buffer is fully sized:

	if (p->sub_cmd == PULL_ELS) {

Is it possible to validate bsg_job->request_len before accessing these
driver-specific payload fields to prevent out-of-bounds accesses?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260727164842.2123122-1-jtaubepe@redhat.com?part=1

      reply	other threads:[~2026-07-27 17:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-27 16:48 [PATCH v4] scsi: qla2xxx: Fix flex array member not at end Jesse Taube
2026-07-27 17:10 ` sashiko-bot [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=20260727171037.0F4351F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=jtaubepe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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