linux-ext4 - Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 11266] New: unable to handle kernel paging request in ext2_free

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080818165131.GC6491@skywalker>
Date:	Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:21:31 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	Sami Liedes <sliedes@...hut.fi>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 11266] New: unable to handle kernel paging
	request in ext2_free_blocks

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 04:58:41PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> 
> From 06953717138efe3ad535e78343beb7204ac0d274 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:45:11 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] ext2: Check for corrupted group descriptor before using data in it
> 
> We have to check whether a group descriptor isn't corrupted in
> read_block_bitmap(). Otherwise ext2_valid_block_bitmap() will try
> to access bits outside of bitmap and Oops happens.
> 
> CC: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
> CC: Sami Liedes <sliedes@...hut.fi>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> ---
>  fs/ext2/balloc.c |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ext2/balloc.c b/fs/ext2/balloc.c
> index 10bb02c..9104712 100644
> --- a/fs/ext2/balloc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext2/balloc.c
> @@ -113,6 +113,17 @@ err_out:
>  	return 0;
>  }
> 
> +static int ext2_block_in_group(struct super_block *sb,
> +			unsigned int block_group, ext2_fsblk_t block)
> +{
> +	if (block < ext2_group_first_block_no(sb, block_group))
> +		return 0;
> +	if (block >= ext2_group_first_block_no(sb, block_group) +
> +	    EXT2_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb))
> +		return 0;
> +	return 1;
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * Read the bitmap for a given block_group,and validate the
>   * bits for block/inode/inode tables are set in the bitmaps
> @@ -129,6 +140,24 @@ read_block_bitmap(struct super_block *sb, unsigned int block_group)
>  	desc = ext2_get_group_desc(sb, block_group, NULL);
>  	if (!desc)
>  		return NULL;
> +	if (!ext2_block_in_group(sb, block_group,
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_block_bitmap)) ||
> +	    !ext2_block_in_group(sb, block_group,
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_inode_bitmap)) ||
> +	    !ext2_block_in_group(sb, block_group,
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_inode_table)) ||
> +	    !ext2_block_in_group(sb, block_group,
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_inode_table) +
> +				EXT2_SB(sb)->s_itb_per_group - 1)) {
> +		ext2_error(sb, __func__, "Corrupted group descriptor - "
> +				"block_group = %u, block_bitmap = %u, "
> +				"inode_bitmap = %u, inode_table = %u",
> +				block_group,
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_block_bitmap),
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_inode_bitmap),
> +				le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_inode_table));
> +		return NULL;
> +	}
>  	bitmap_blk = le32_to_cpu(desc->bg_block_bitmap);
>  	bh = sb_getblk(sb, bitmap_blk);
>  	if (unlikely(!bh)) {

Do we need to do this validation every time we do a read_block_bitmap ?
I guess we need to move the validation where we read the desc blocks
from the disk.

-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html