netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@gmail.com>
To: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
	kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org,
	sagi@grimberg.me, willemb@google.com, almasrymina@google.com,
	kaiyuanz@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: devmem: drop iterator type check
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 07:41:52 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCtDMJDtP0DxUBqj@mini-arch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ab1959f9-1b94-4e7f-ba33-12453cb50027@gmail.com>

On 05/19, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 5/16/25 23:54, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > sendmsg() with a single iov becomes ITER_UBUF, sendmsg() with multiple
> > iovs becomes ITER_IOVEC. Instead of adjusting the check to include
> > ITER_UBUF, drop the check completely. The callers are guaranteed
> > to happen from system call side and we don't need to pay runtime
> > cost to verify it.
> 
> I asked for this because io_uring can pass bvecs. Only sendzc can
> pass that with cmsg, so probably you won't be able to hit any
> real issue, but io_uring needs and soon will have bvec support for
> normal sends as well. One can argue we should care as it isn't
> merged yet, but there is something very very wrong if an unrelated
> and legal io_uring change is able to open a vulnerability in the
> devmem path.

Any reason not to filter these out on the io_uring side? Or you'll
have to interpret sendmsg flags again which is not nice?

  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-19 14:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-16 22:54 [PATCH net-next] net: devmem: drop iterator type check Stanislav Fomichev
2025-05-17  4:45 ` Mina Almasry
2025-05-17  4:48   ` Stanislav Fomichev
2025-05-19 10:45 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-19 14:41   ` Stanislav Fomichev [this message]
2025-05-19 15:19     ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-19 15:39       ` Stanislav Fomichev

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=aCtDMJDtP0DxUBqj@mini-arch \
    --to=stfomichev@gmail.com \
    --cc=almasrymina@google.com \
    --cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kaiyuanz@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=willemb@google.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).