public inbox for op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tee: Prevent size calculation wraparound on 32-bit kernels
Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 12:41:01 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250502134058.0f3e79cc@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: < <CAG48ez1DPWhT2dhd1iptFawWjteh_=pZ4M6Yq5KKCq2DTArnqw@mail.gmail.com>>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1112 bytes --]

On Fri, 2 May 2025 14:28:21 +0200
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 1, 2025 at 10:02 PM David Laight
> <david.laight.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:06:43 +0200
> > Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
> >  
> > > The current code around TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_SIZE() is a bit wrong on
> > > 32-bit kernels: Multiplying a user-provided 32-bit value with the
> > > size of a structure can wrap around on such platforms.
> > >
> > > Fix it by using saturating arithmetic for the size calculation.  
> >
> > Why not just add a sanity check on 'num_params' after it is read.
> > Max is 31 (1024-32)/32), but any sane limit will do because of
> > the buf.buf_len test.  
> 
> That would work, too. I don't know which way looks nicer.

The saturating arithmetic functions are non-obvious and non-trivial.
I looked at the code to check where buf.buf_len came from,
without its sanity check the user could craft a request where it
matched the saturated size.

I think I'd sanity check the number of items and then check that that
buffer length is right for the number of items.

	David

       reply	other threads:[~2025-05-02 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] < <CAG48ez1DPWhT2dhd1iptFawWjteh_=pZ4M6Yq5KKCq2DTArnqw@mail.gmail.com>
2025-05-02 12:41 ` David Laight [this message]
     [not found] < <CAK8z29XWCujUdLXcHz075+xcix8HV2Mp3EtxxX9GB7vGjwi3HA@mail.gmail.com>
2025-04-30 13:00 ` [PATCH] tee: Prevent size calculation wraparound on 32-bit kernels Jens Wiklander
     [not found] < <CAHUa44E_JZdYnGrReP0zWCP1wdu2BdJ9DSZZ3a2OiobRj61ThQ@mail.gmail.com>
2025-04-30 12:12 ` Rouven Czerwinski
2025-04-28 13:06 Jann Horn
2025-04-30 11:52 ` Jens Wiklander
2025-05-01 20:01 ` David Laight
2025-05-02 12:28   ` Jann Horn

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=20250502134058.0f3e79cc@pumpkin \
    --to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org \
    /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