From: Remi Pommarel <repk@triplefau.lt>
To: Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org>
Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Marek Lindner <marek.lindner@mailbox.org>,
Simon Wunderlich <sw@simonwunderlich.de>,
Erick Archer <erick.archer@outlook.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] batman-adv: Fix incorrect offset in batadv_tt_tvlv_ogm_handler_v1()
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 09:32:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z5nngheTbToYRJFi@pilgrim> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2593315.VLH7GnMWUR@sven-l14>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:18:06PM +0100, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
> On Tuesday, 28 January 2025 16:11:06 GMT+1 Remi Pommarel wrote:
> > Since commit 4436df478860 ("batman-adv: Add flex array to struct
> > batadv_tvlv_tt_data"), the introduction of batadv_tvlv_tt_data's flex
> > array member in batadv_tt_tvlv_ogm_handler_v1() put tt_changes at
> > invalid offset. Those TT changes are supposed to be filled from the end
> > of batadv_tvlv_tt_data structure (including vlan_data flexible array),
> > but only the flex array size is taken into account missing completely
> > the size of the fixed part of the structure itself.
> >
> > Fix the tt_change offset computation by using struct_size() instead of
> > flex_array_size() so both flex array member and its container structure
> > sizes are taken into account.
> >
> > Fixes: 4436df478860 ("batman-adv: Add flex array to struct batadv_tvlv_tt_data")
> > Signed-off-by: Remi Pommarel <repk@triplefau.lt>
>
> Thanks for the patch. I just wanted to dump my notes here (because it is
> getting a little late).
>
>
> Original calculation was:
>
> 1. tvlv_value_len -= 4 [sizeof(*tt_data)]
> 2. check if tvlv_value_len contains at least num_vlan * 8 bytes [sizeof(*tt_vlan)]
> 3. tt_vlan = vlan section at offset 4 [sizeof(*tt_data)]
> 4. tt_change = change section at offset offset 4 [sizeof(*tt_data)] + num_vlan * 8 bytes [sizeof(*tt_vlan)]
> 5. tvlv_value_len was reduced by num_vlan * 8 bytes [sizeof(*tt_vlan)]
> 6. num_entries was calculated using tvlv_value_len / 12 [sizeof(batadv_tvlv_tt_change)]
>
> result:
>
> * tt_vlan = tt_data + 4
> * tt_change = tt_data + 4 + num_vlan * 8
> * num_entries = (tvlv_value_len - (4 + num_vlan * 8)) / 12
>
>
> After Erick's change
>
> 1. tvlv_value_len -= 4 [sizeof(*tt_data)]
> 2. calculation of the flexible (vlan) part as num_vlan * 8 [sizeof(tt_data->vlan_data)]
> 3. check if tvlv_value_len contains at the flexible (vlan) part
> 4. tt_change = change section at offset num_vlan * 8 bytes [sizeof(*tt_vlan)]
> (which is wrong by 4 bytes)
> 5. tvlv_value_len was reduced by num_vlan * 8 bytes [sizeof(*tt_vlan)]
> 6. num_entries was calculated using tvlv_value_len / 12 [sizeof(batadv_tvlv_tt_change)]
> 7. "tt_vlan" is implicitly used from offset 4 [tt_data->ttvn]
>
> result:
>
> * tt_vlan = tt_data + 4
> * tt_change = tt_data + num_vlan * 8
> * num_entries = (tvlv_value_len - (4 + num_vlan * 8)) / 12
>
>
> The broken part of the change was basically following:
>
> - tt_vlan = (struct batadv_tvlv_tt_vlan_data *)(tt_data + 1);
> - tt_change = (struct batadv_tvlv_tt_change *)(tt_vlan + num_vlan);
> - tvlv_value_len -= sizeof(*tt_vlan) * num_vlan;
> + tt_change = (struct batadv_tvlv_tt_change *)((void *)tt_data
> + + flex_size);
> + tvlv_value_len -= flex_size;
>
>
> if the line
>
> + tt_change = (struct batadv_tvlv_tt_change *)((void *)tt_data
> + + flex_size);
>
> would have been replaced with
>
> + tt_change = (struct batadv_tvlv_tt_change *)((void *)tt_data->vlan_data
> + + flex_size);
>
> then it should also have worked.
Erick's initial patch was almost doing that but Kees emitted concern
that this could bother the compiler bound checker and suggest the
current flawed logic [0] (hence him in CC). I wasn't sure the (void *)
cast would prevent the bound checker to complain here, so I tried to
also follow the "addressing from the base pointer" strategy Kees
mentioned.
On a side note, I am all about hardening and memory safety stuff but
if that means impacting readability and spending more time trying to
please the tool than thinking about the correctness of the code change,
that's where we end up converting a perfectly fine code into a
logically flawed one.
[0]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202404291030.F760C26@keescook/
--
Remi
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-29 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-28 15:11 [PATCH] batman-adv: Fix incorrect offset in batadv_tt_tvlv_ogm_handler_v1() Remi Pommarel
2025-01-28 22:18 ` Sven Eckelmann
2025-01-28 22:23 ` Sven Eckelmann
2025-01-29 8:32 ` Remi Pommarel [this message]
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=Z5nngheTbToYRJFi@pilgrim \
--to=repk@triplefau.lt \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org \
--cc=erick.archer@outlook.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marek.lindner@mailbox.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sven@narfation.org \
--cc=sw@simonwunderlich.de \
/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).