[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <12824789.NeILaJ7Kvc@machine>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:50:00 +0200
From: Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] Fix unefficient call to memset before memcpu in nla_strlcpy.
Le samedi 17 octobre 2020, 01:19:59 CEST Kees Cook a écrit :
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 02:52:14PM +0200, laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com
wrote:
> > From: Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com>
> >
> > This patch solves part 1 of issue:
> > https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/110
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com>
> > ---
> >
> > lib/nlattr.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/nlattr.c b/lib/nlattr.c
> > index 74019c8ebf6b..ab96a5f4b9b8 100644
> > --- a/lib/nlattr.c
> > +++ b/lib/nlattr.c
> > @@ -731,8 +731,8 @@ size_t nla_strlcpy(char *dst, const struct nlattr
> > *nla, size_t dstsize)>
> > if (dstsize > 0) {
> >
> > size_t len = (srclen >= dstsize) ? dstsize - 1 : srclen;
> >
> > - memset(dst, 0, dstsize);
> >
> > memcpy(dst, src, len);
> >
> > + dst[len] = '\0';
>
> I don't think this is right: callers are likely depending on the entire
> destination buffer to be zero-padded. I think you probably want:
>
> memset(dst + len, 0, dstsize - len);
> memcpy(dst, src, len);
>
> (but double-check my pointer math)
>
I did not understand that the content has to be zero-padded, now your comment
on github is clearer!
I will modifiy it for next version and check the math on the paper.
> > }
> >
> > return srclen;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists