From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: cttimeout: remove VLA usage Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:13:47 -0700 Message-ID: <1520957627.2049.37.camel@perches.com> References: <20180312231442.GA22071@embeddedgus> <1520899118.2049.24.camel@perches.com> <20180313145947.tpekwvyioaft5auc@salvia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" , Jozsef Kadlecsik , Florian Westphal , "David S. Miller" , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kernel Hardening , Kees Cook , "Gustavo A. R. Silva" To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: In-Reply-To: <20180313145947.tpekwvyioaft5auc@salvia> List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 15:59 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 04:58:38PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-03-12 at 18:14 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > > In preparation to enabling -Wvla, remove VLA and replace it > > > with dynamic memory allocation. > > > > > > From a security viewpoint, the use of Variable Length Arrays can be > > > a vector for stack overflow attacks. Also, in general, as the code > > > evolves it is easy to lose track of how big a VLA can get. Thus, we > > > can end up having segfaults that are hard to debug. > > > > > > Also, fixed as part of the directive to remove all VLAs from > > > > [] > > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_cttimeout.c b/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_cttimeout.c > > > > [] > > > @@ -51,19 +51,27 @@ ctnl_timeout_parse_policy(void *timeouts, > > > const struct nf_conntrack_l4proto *l4proto, > > > struct net *net, const struct nlattr *attr) > > > { > > > + struct nlattr **tb; > > > int ret = 0; > > > > > > - if (likely(l4proto->ctnl_timeout.nlattr_to_obj)) { > > > - struct nlattr *tb[l4proto->ctnl_timeout.nlattr_max+1]; > > > + if (!l4proto->ctnl_timeout.nlattr_to_obj) > > > + return 0; > > > > Why not > > if unlikely(!...) > > This is control plane code - not packet path - I think we should just > let the compiler decide on this one, not really need to provide an > explicit hint here. I don't have an issue with that, but it should probably be mentioned in the changelog as it's unrelated to VLA removal.