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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4657036.ZfE1bQA0bl@machine> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:41:13 +0100 From: Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, dja@...ens.net Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/5] Fortify strscpy() Le mardi 17 novembre 2020, 23:06:07 CET Kees Cook a écrit : > On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 03:50:07PM +0100, laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com wrote: > > This patch set answers to this issue: > > https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/46 > > > > I based my modifications on top of two patches from Daniel Axtens which > > modify calls to __builtin_object_size to ensure the true size of char * > > are returned and not the surrounding structure size. > > > > To sum up, in my first patch I implemented a fortified version of strscpy. > > This new version ensures the following before calling vanilla strscpy: > > 1. There is no read overflow because we either size is smaller than src > > length or we shrink size to src length by calling fortified strnlen. > > 2. There is no write overflow because we either failed during compilation > > or at runtime by checking that size is smaller than dest size. > > The second patch brings a new file in LKDTM driver to test this new > > version. The test ensures the fortified version still returns the same > > value as the vanilla one while panic'ing when there is a write overflow. > > The third just corrects some typos in LKDTM related file. > > > > If you see any problem or way to improve the code, feel free to share it. > > Thanks! This looks really good. You can drop the "RFC" parts, and for > v5, please use > > To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> > > and add to Cc: > > linux-mm@...ck.org > linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org > > I think going via -mm is the most sensible, since that's where the other > fortify pieces landed. You are welcome and thank you for the reviews! I rebase it on Linus Torvalds' tree and I send the V5.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists