linux-hardening - Re: [RFC] Mitigating unexpected arithmetic overflow

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: <Zkg4fl1t6sKGPSb6@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 06:11:26 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC] Mitigating unexpected arithmetic overflow

On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 11:11:35PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> 	Or even just simple math between u8s:
> 
> 	while (xas->xa_offset == 255) {
> 		xas->xa_offset = xas->xa_node->offset - 1;
> 
> 	Is it expecting to wrap (truncate)? How is it distinguished from
> 	the "num_elems++" case?

Hi ;-)

This looks to me like it's walking up the tree, looking to go to the
'prev' element.  So yes, the wrapping from 0 to 255 is intentional,
because once we find an offset that's not 0, we've set offset to the
right one.  Just to give more context, here's the few lines around it:

        if (xas->xa_offset != get_offset(xas->xa_index, xas->xa_node))
                xas->xa_offset--;

        while (xas->xa_offset == 255) {
                xas->xa_offset = xas->xa_node->offset - 1;
                xas->xa_node = xa_parent(xas->xa, xas->xa_node);
                if (!xas->xa_node)
                        return set_bounds(xas);
        }

So it's kind of nasty.  I don't want to write it as:

	while (xas->xa_offset == 0) {
		xas->xa_offset = xas->xa_node->offset;
		xas->xa_node = xa_parent(xas->xa, xas->xa_node);
	}
	xas->xa_offset--;

because there's that conditional subtraction before the loop starts.
The xarray test-suite is pretty good if anyone thinks they have a clearer
way to write this loop ...