public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] crypto: add buffer overflow checks to testmgr
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 21:12:15 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A2087EF.8000709@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090529221055.GA17957@gondor.apana.org.au>

On 05/29/2009 06:10 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:32:54AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>> At present, its entirely possible to add a test vector to testmgr with
>> an input longer than a page in length w/o specifying a .np option, and
>> overflow the page of memory allocated to {a,}xbuf[0], silently
>> corrupting memory. I know, because I've accidentally done it. :)
>>
>> While this doesn't currently happen in practice w/the existing code,
>> due to all !np vectors being less than a 4k page in length (and the
>> page allocation loop often returns contiguous pages anyway), explicit
>> checks or a way to remove the 4k limit would be a good idea.
>>
>> A few ways to fix and/or work around this:
>>
>> 1) allocate some larger guaranteed contiguous buffers using
>> __get_free_pages() or kmalloc and use them in the !np case
>>
>> 2) catch the > PAGE_SIZE && !np case and then do things similar to how
>> they are done in the np case
>>
>> 3) catch the > PAGE_SIZE && !np case and simply exit with an error
>>
>> Since there currently aren't any test vectors that are actually larger
>> than a page and not tagged np, option 1 seems like a waste of memory
>> and option 2 sounds like unnecessary complexity, so I'd offer up
>> option 3 as the most viable alternative right now.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
> 
> I just posted exactly the same thing yesterday :)

Oh, haha, serves me right for not looking first... Your variant seems to
be a bit more complete too, as I didn't look at any of the possible cases
where there might be overflows when using scatterlists. Cool, worksforme!

Thanks much,

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com


  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-30  1:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-29 15:32 [RFC PATCH] crypto: add buffer overflow checks to testmgr Jarod Wilson
2009-05-29 19:27 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-29 22:10 ` Herbert Xu
2009-05-30  1:12   ` Jarod Wilson [this message]
2009-06-04 21:59   ` Jarod Wilson
2009-06-05  7:02     ` Herbert Xu

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=4A2087EF.8000709@redhat.com \
    --to=jarod@redhat.com \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.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