From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756300AbdKOIlM (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 15 Nov 2017 03:41:12 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:44318 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1754189AbdKOIlE (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 15 Nov 2017 03:41:04 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYEVsx8rKXGS76g6jTB3SFmF+DRWktXBlnbLZFnkaf4IJEIm5m8Eu2dbE82pNRbv9yFkmZPrA==
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 09:41:00 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        ricardo.neri@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 4/4] x86/umip: Warn if UMIP-protected
 instructions are used
Message-ID: <20171115084100.lkzww5e56asjtkyy@gmail.com>
References: <1510640985-18412-1-git-send-email-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <1510640985-18412-5-git-send-email-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <20171114073408.tir3raeas7ouvyzp@gmail.com>
 <20171115025603.GB10377@voyager>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171115025603.GB10377@voyager>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> > > +	snprintf(warn, sizeof(warn), "%s %s", umip_insns[umip_inst],
> > > +		 umip_warn_use);
> > 
> > This is incredibly fragile against future buffer overflows, and warning about it 
> > in comments does not make it less fragile!
> 
> I need to concatenate the instruction mnemonic with the a string. Does something like
> this is more acceptable?
> 
> 	unsigned char warn[50];
> 
> 	...
> 
> 	strcpy(warn, umip_insns[umip_inst]);
> 	strcat(warn, " instruction cannot be used by applications.");
> 	umip_pr_warn(regs, warn, 0);
> 
> In this manner I use the string literal directly but I still have a buffer that might
> overflow. Code looks more clear to me. I could #defines for the string lengths or
> set a maximum length.

This is still very fragile.

The right solution would be to make umip_pr_warn() a varargs helper function, so 
that you can just use it to print things the usual way. I'd also use a 
__attribute__((format(printf))) specification to get good build-time warnings.

Thanks,

	Ingo