netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
	davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
	pabeni@redhat.com, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] netlink: split up copies in the ack construction
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 22:13:06 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221116221306.5a4bd5f8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1b373b08-988d-b870-d363-814f8083157c@embeddedor.com>

On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 19:20:51 -0600 Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> On 11/16/22 19:05, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >> This seems to be a sensible change. In general, it's not a good idea
> >> to have variable length objects (flex-array members) in structures used
> >> as headers, and that we know will ultimately be followed by more objects
> >> when embedded inside other structures.  
> > 
> > Meaning we should go back to zero-length arrays instead?  
> 
> No.

I was asking based on your own commit 1e6e9d0f4859 ("uapi: revert
flexible-array conversions"). This is uAPI as well.

Since we can't prevent user space from wrapping structures seems
like adding a flex member to an existing struct should never be
permitted in uAPI headers? We can just wrap things locally, I guess:

diff --git a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
index 9ebdf3262015..2af2f8de4043 100644
--- a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
+++ b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
@@ -2479,7 +2479,10 @@ void netlink_ack(struct sk_buff *in_skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, int err,
 {
        struct sk_buff *skb;
        struct nlmsghdr *rep;
-       struct nlmsgerr *errmsg;
+       struct hashtag_silly {
+               struct nlmsgerr err;
+               u8 data[];
+       } *errmsg;
        size_t payload = sizeof(*errmsg);
        struct netlink_sock *nlk = nlk_sk(NETLINK_CB(in_skb).sk);
        unsigned int flags = 0;
@@ -2507,15 +2510,14 @@ void netlink_ack(struct sk_buff *in_skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, int err,
        if (!rep)
                goto err_bad_put;
        errmsg = nlmsg_data(rep);
-       errmsg->error = err;
-       errmsg->msg = *nlh;
+       errmsg->err.error = err;
+       errmsg->err.msg = *nlh;
 
        if (!(flags & NLM_F_CAPPED)) {
                if (!nlmsg_append(skb, nlmsg_len(nlh)))
                        goto err_bad_put;
 
-               memcpy(errmsg->msg.nlmsg_data, nlh->nlmsg_data,
-                      nlmsg_len(nlh));
+               memcpy(errmsg->data, nlmsg_data(nlh), nlmsg_len(nlh));
        }
 
        if (tlvlen)

In this particular case, tho, we're probably better off giving up 
on the flex array and doing nlmsg_data() on both src and dst.

> > Is there something in the standard that makes flexible array
> > at the end of an embedded struct a problem?  
> 
> I haven't seen any problems ss long as the flex-array appears last:
> 
> struct foo {
> 	... members
> 	struct boo {
> 		... members
> 		char flex[];
> 	};
> };
> 
> struct complex {
> 	... members
> 	struct foo embedded;
> };
> 
> However, the GCC docs[1] mention this:
> 
> "A structure containing a flexible array member [..] may not be a
> member of a structure [..] (However, these uses are permitted by GCC
> as extensions.)"
> 
> And in this case it seems that's the reason why GCC doesn't complain?

Seems so, clang's warning is called -Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-17  6:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-27 21:25 [PATCH net-next v2] netlink: split up copies in the ack construction Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-31  9:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2022-11-14  2:39 ` David Ahern
2022-11-14 17:06   ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-16 22:53     ` Kees Cook
2022-11-16 22:56       ` Kees Cook
2022-11-17  0:27         ` Kees Cook
2022-11-17  0:55           ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2022-11-17  1:05             ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-17  1:20               ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2022-11-17  6:13                 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-11-17 16:25                   ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-11-17 20:36                     ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-17 22:35                       ` Kees Cook
2022-11-18  0:28                         ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-18  3:27                           ` Kees Cook
2022-11-18 15:59                           ` David Ahern
2022-11-18  2:37                       ` Stephen Hemminger

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=20221116221306.5a4bd5f8@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).