public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@gmx.de>, Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
	 LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] platform/x86/amd/pmf: Fix possible out-of-bound memory accesses
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:45:11 +0200 (EET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2dd63b5b-cf60-9f28-55b3-35eab537dc9b@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240227145500.299683-2-W_Armin@gmx.de>

Hi Shyam & Armin,

Shyam, please take a look at the question below.

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Armin Wolf wrote:

> The length of the policy buffer is not validated before accessing it,
> which means that multiple out-of-bounds memory accesses can occur.
> 
> This is especially bad since userspace can load policy binaries over
> debugfs.

> +	if (dev->policy_sz < POLICY_COOKIE_LEN + sizeof(length))
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
>  	cookie = *(u32 *)(dev->policy_buf + POLICY_COOKIE_OFFSET);
>  	length = *(u32 *)(dev->policy_buf + POLICY_COOKIE_LEN);

This starts to feel like adding a struct for the header(?) would be better
course of action here as then one could compare against sizeof(*header) 
and avoid all those casts (IMO, just access the header fields directly 
w/o the local variables).

Shyam, do you think a struct makes sense here? There's some header in 
this policy, right?


There are more thing to address here...

1) amd_pmf_start_policy_engine() function returns -EINVAL & res that is 
   TA_PMF_* which inconsistent in type of the return value

2) Once 1) is fixed, the caller shadowing the return code can be fixed as 
   well:
        ret = amd_pmf_start_policy_engine(dev);
        if (ret)
                return -EINVAL;


-- 
 i.



  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-27 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-27 14:54 [PATCH v2 1/2] platform/x86/amd/pmf: Do not use readl() for policy buffer access Armin Wolf
2024-02-27 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] platform/x86/amd/pmf: Fix possible out-of-bound memory accesses Armin Wolf
2024-02-27 15:45   ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2024-02-28 11:16     ` Shyam Sundar S K
2024-02-28 20:48       ` Armin Wolf
2024-02-29 12:05         ` Ilpo Järvinen

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=2dd63b5b-cf60-9f28-55b3-35eab537dc9b@linux.intel.com \
    --to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com \
    --cc=W_Armin@gmx.de \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=platform-driver-x86@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