From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, sashal@kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@meta.com,
Michael van der Westhuizen <rmikey@meta.com>,
Tobias Fleig <tfleig@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stable: crypto: sha256 - fix crash at kexec
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 09:23:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251001162305.GE1592@sol> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251001-stable_crash-v1-1-3071c0bd795e@debian.org>
On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 09:07:07AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> Loading a large (~2.1G) files with kexec crashes the host with when
> running:
>
> # kexec --load kernel --initrd initrd_with_2G_or_more
>
> UBSAN: signed-integer-overflow in ./include/crypto/sha256_base.h:64:19
> 34152083 * 64 cannot be represented in type 'int'
> ...
> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ff9fffff83b624c0
> sha256_update (lib/crypto/sha256.c:137)
> crypto_sha256_update (crypto/sha256_generic.c:40)
> kexec_calculate_store_digests (kernel/kexec_file.c:769)
> __se_sys_kexec_file_load (kernel/kexec_file.c:397 kernel/kexec_file.c:332)
> ...
>
> (Line numbers based on commit da274362a7bd9 ("Linux 6.12.49")
>
> This is not happening upstream (v6.16+), given that `block` type was
> upgraded from "int" to "size_t" in commit 74a43a2cf5e8 ("crypto:
> lib/sha256 - Move partial block handling out")
>
> Upgrade the block type similar to the commit above, avoiding hitting the
> overflow.
>
> This patch is only suitable for the stable tree, and before 6.16, which
> got commit 74a43a2cf5e8 ("crypto: lib/sha256 - Move partial block
> handling out")
>
> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
> Fixes: 11b8d5ef9138 ("crypto: sha256 - implement base layer for SHA-256") # not after v6.16
> Reported-by: Michael van der Westhuizen <rmikey@meta.com>
> Reported-by: Tobias Fleig <tfleig@meta.com>
> ---
> include/crypto/sha256_base.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/crypto/sha256_base.h b/include/crypto/sha256_base.h
> index e0418818d63c8..fa63af10102b2 100644
> --- a/include/crypto/sha256_base.h
> +++ b/include/crypto/sha256_base.h
> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static inline int lib_sha256_base_do_update(struct sha256_state *sctx,
> sctx->count += len;
>
> if (unlikely((partial + len) >= SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE)) {
> - int blocks;
> + size_t blocks;
>
> if (partial) {
> int p = SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE - partial;
>
> ---
This looks fine, but technically 'unsigned int' would be more
appropriate here, given the context. If we look at the whole function
in 6.12, we can see that it took an 'unsigned int' length:
static inline int lib_sha256_base_do_update(struct sha256_state *sctx,
const u8 *data,
unsigned int len,
sha256_block_fn *block_fn)
{
unsigned int partial = sctx->count % SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE;
sctx->count += len;
if (unlikely((partial + len) >= SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE)) {
- int blocks;
+ size_t blocks;
if (partial) {
int p = SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE - partial;
memcpy(sctx->buf + partial, data, p);
data += p;
len -= p;
block_fn(sctx, sctx->buf, 1);
}
blocks = len / SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE;
len %= SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE;
if (blocks) {
block_fn(sctx, data, blocks);
data += blocks * SHA256_BLOCK_SIZE;
}
partial = 0;
}
if (len)
memcpy(sctx->buf + partial, data, len);
return 0;
}
This also suggests that files with lengths greater than UINT_MAX are
still broken. Is that okay?
Anyway, I'm glad that I fixed all these functions to use size_t lengths
in newer kernels...
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-01 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-01 16:07 [PATCH] stable: crypto: sha256 - fix crash at kexec Breno Leitao
2025-10-01 16:23 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2025-10-01 16:45 ` Breno Leitao
2025-10-01 16:54 ` Eric Biggers
2025-10-02 10:02 ` Breno Leitao
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=20251001162305.GE1592@sol \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmikey@meta.com \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tfleig@meta.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