From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org,
kuba@kernel.org, kuni1840@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, slyich@gmail.com,
willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net] af_packet: Fix fortified memcpy() without flex array.
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 10:21:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202310091020.18B4F8D27@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231009171228.89827-1-kuniyu@amazon.com>
On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 10:12:28AM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 09:01:34 -0700
> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 08:31:52AM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > > Sergei Trofimovich reported a regression [0] caused by commit a0ade8404c3b
> > > ("af_packet: Fix warning of fortified memcpy() in packet_getname().").
> > >
> > > It introduced a flex array sll_addr_flex in struct sockaddr_ll as a
> > > union-ed member with sll_addr to work around the fortified memcpy() check.
> > >
> > > However, a userspace program uses a struct that has struct sockaddr_ll in
> > > the middle, where a flex array is illegal to exist.
> > >
> > > include/linux/if_packet.h:24:17: error: flexible array member 'sockaddr_ll::<unnamed union>::<unnamed struct>::sll_addr_flex' not at end of 'struct packet_info_t'
> > > 24 | __DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(unsigned char, sll_addr_flex);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > To fix the regression, let's go back to the first attempt [1] telling
> > > memcpy() the actual size of the array.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Sergei Trofimovich <slyich@gmail.com>
> > > Closes: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/252587#issuecomment-1741733002 [0]
> >
> > Eww. That's a buggy definition -- it could get overflowed.
>
> Only if they pass sizeof(struct sockaddr_storage) to getsockname().
>
>
> >
> > But okay, we don't break userspace.
> >
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230720004410.87588-3-kuniyu@amazon.com/ [1]
> > > Fixes: a0ade8404c3b ("af_packet: Fix warning of fortified memcpy() in packet_getname().")
> > > Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/uapi/linux/if_packet.h | 6 +-----
> > > net/packet/af_packet.c | 7 ++++++-
> > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_packet.h b/include/uapi/linux/if_packet.h
> > > index 4d0ad22f83b5..9efc42382fdb 100644
> > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_packet.h
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_packet.h
> > > @@ -18,11 +18,7 @@ struct sockaddr_ll {
> > > unsigned short sll_hatype;
> > > unsigned char sll_pkttype;
> > > unsigned char sll_halen;
> > > - union {
> > > - unsigned char sll_addr[8];
> > > - /* Actual length is in sll_halen. */
> > > - __DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(unsigned char, sll_addr_flex);
> > > - };
> > > + unsigned char sll_addr[8];
> > > };
> >
> > Yup, we need to do at least this.
> >
> > >
> > > /* Packet types */
> > > diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > index 8f97648d652f..a84e00b5904b 100644
> > > --- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > +++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > @@ -3607,7 +3607,12 @@ static int packet_getname(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr,
> > > if (dev) {
> > > sll->sll_hatype = dev->type;
> > > sll->sll_halen = dev->addr_len;
> > > - memcpy(sll->sll_addr_flex, dev->dev_addr, dev->addr_len);
> > > +
> > > + /* Let __fortify_memcpy_chk() know the actual buffer size. */
> > > + memcpy(((struct sockaddr_storage *)sll)->__data +
> > > + offsetof(struct sockaddr_ll, sll_addr) -
> > > + offsetofend(struct sockaddr_ll, sll_family),
> > > + dev->dev_addr, dev->addr_len);
> > > } else {
> > > sll->sll_hatype = 0; /* Bad: we have no ARPHRD_UNSPEC */
> > > sll->sll_halen = 0;
> >
> > I still think this is a mistake. We're papering over so many lies to the
> > compiler. :P If "uaddr" is actually "struct sockaddr_storage", then we
> > should update the callers...
>
> We could update all callers to pass sockaddr_storage but it seems too much
> for net.git.. :/ I think the conversion should be done later for net-next.
>
> $ grep -rn -E "\.getname.*?=" | cut -f 2 -d"=" | sort | uniq | wc -l
> 40
Agreed -- it's something to do going forward. Your fix is likely the
right approach to take to undo the UAPI change.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-09 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-09 15:31 [PATCH v1 net] af_packet: Fix fortified memcpy() without flex array Kuniyuki Iwashima
2023-10-09 16:01 ` Kees Cook
2023-10-09 17:12 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2023-10-09 17:21 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2023-10-12 7:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=202310091020.18B4F8D27@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuni1840@gmail.com \
--cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=slyich@gmail.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.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