[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202310011335.28B55A3BE@keescook>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2023 13:37:04 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...ux.intel.com>,
Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com>,
Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@....com>,
Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
sound-open-firmware@...a-project.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] ASoC: SOF: ipc4-topology: Use size_add() in call
to struct_size()
On Sun, Oct 01, 2023 at 11:25:59AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 12:14:59PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 13:09:11 -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>
> > > If, for any reason, the open-coded arithmetic causes a wraparound,
> > > the protection that `struct_size()` adds against potential integer
> > > overflows is defeated. Fix this by hardening call to `struct_size()`
> > > with `size_add()`.
>
> > [1/1] ASoC: SOF: ipc4-topology: Use size_add() in call to struct_size()
> > https://git.kernel.org/kees/c/93d2858dd630
>
> Why is this bypassing the ASoC tree?
Hi! Sorry, I can drop it if you want to take it? I tend to collect trivial
hardening changes with reviews that haven't been otherwise commented on
for at least 2 weeks.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists