From: Benjamin Tissoires <bentiss@kernel.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 2/2] HID: core: Check to ensure report responses match the request
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:52:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ablqdkI1d47xN0LM@beelink> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260317092056.GE554736@google.com>
On Mar 17 2026, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2026, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>
> > On Mar 09 2026, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > It is possible for a malicious (or clumsy) device to respond to a
> > > specific report's feature request using a completely different report
> > > ID. This can cause confusion in the HID core resulting in nasty
> > > side-effects such as OOB writes.
> > >
> > > Add a check to ensure that the report ID in the response, matches the
> > > one that was requested.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > v2 -> v3: Cover more bases by moving the check up a layer from MT to HID Core
> > >
> > > RFC query: Is this always okay?
> > > Should the report number always match the request?
> > > Are there legitimate times where the two would differ?
> >
> > Technically, there is no reasons for a HID_SET_REPORT request to change
> > the incoming buffer. So that test might break it.
> >
> > I prefered fixing the calling sites (hid-multitouch and others), because
> > here we are making decisions on the device behaviour which is not ours
> > to make. More specifically, such a test will prevent us to fix a bogus
> > device by plainly rejecting the call after the facts.
>
> Okay, so this one is a NACK? No changes, do not resend?
>
Yes, NACK on this one. I've merged the hid-multitouch one which wasn't
using the API correctly, please send a followup for the other similar
cases.
Cheers,
Benjamin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-17 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-09 14:59 [RFC v3 1/2] HID: core: Mitigate potential OOB by removing bogus memset() Lee Jones
2026-03-09 14:59 ` [RFC v3 2/2] HID: core: Check to ensure report responses match the request Lee Jones
2026-03-16 15:28 ` Benjamin Tissoires
2026-03-17 9:20 ` Lee Jones
2026-03-17 14:52 ` Benjamin Tissoires [this message]
2026-03-16 15:14 ` [RFC v3 1/2] HID: core: Mitigate potential OOB by removing bogus memset() Lee Jones
2026-03-16 15:26 ` Benjamin Tissoires
2026-03-16 15:59 ` (subset) " Benjamin Tissoires
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=ablqdkI1d47xN0LM@beelink \
--to=bentiss@kernel.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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