linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xhci: fix null-pointer dereference when destroying half-built segment rings

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: <508ECC63.3020302@mvista.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:35:15 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>
To:	Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xhci: fix null-pointer dereference when destroying half-built
 segment rings

Hello.

On 10/29/2012 08:00 PM, Julius Werner wrote:

> xhci_alloc_segments_for_ring() builds a list of xhci_segments and links
> the tail to head at the end (forming a ring). When it bails out for OOM
> reasons half-way through, it tries to destroy its half-built list with
> xhci_free_segments_for_ring(), even though it is not a ring yet. This
> causes a null-pointer dereference upon hitting the last element.

> Furthermore, one of its callers (xhci_ring_alloc()) mistakenly believes
> the output parameters to be valid upon this kind of OOM failure, and
> calls xhci_ring_free() on them. Since the (incomplete) list/ring should
> already be destroyed in that case, this would lead to a use after free.

> This patch fixes those issues by having xhci_alloc_segments_for_ring()
> destroy its half-built, non-circular list manually and destroying the
> invalid struct xhci_ring in xhci_ring_alloc() with a plain kfree().

> Signed-off-by: Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c |    8 ++++++--
>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c
> index 487bc08..420ba37 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c
> @@ -205,7 +205,11 @@ static int xhci_alloc_segments_for_ring(struct xhci_hcd *xhci,
>  
>  		next = xhci_segment_alloc(xhci, cycle_state, flags);
>  		if (!next) {
> -			xhci_free_segments_for_ring(xhci, *first);
> +			prev = *first;
> +			do {
> +				next = prev->next;
> +				xhci_segment_free(xhci, prev);
> +			} while ((prev = next));

   It's preferred that the assignments are done outside the *if* and *while*
statements. In fact, at least for the *if* statements scripts/checkpatch.pl
gives a warning (it was silent in this case).

>  			return -ENOMEM;
>  		}
>  		xhci_link_segments(xhci, prev, next, type);
> @@ -258,7 +262,7 @@ static struct xhci_ring *xhci_ring_alloc(struct xhci_hcd *xhci,
>  	return ring;
>  
>  fail:
> -	xhci_ring_free(xhci, ring);
> +	kfree(ring);
>  	return NULL;
>  }

[headless@...ted linux]$ scripts/checkpatch.pl
patches/xhci-fix-null-pointer-dereference-when-destroying-half-built-segment-rings.patch

ERROR: DOS line endings
#30: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c:208:
+^I^I^Iprev = *first;^M$

ERROR: DOS line endings
#31: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c:209:
+^I^I^Ido {^M$

ERROR: DOS line endings
#32: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c:210:
+^I^I^I^Inext = prev->next;^M$

ERROR: DOS line endings
#33: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c:211:
+^I^I^I^Ixhci_segment_free(xhci, prev);^M$

ERROR: DOS line endings
#34: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c:212:
+^I^I^I} while ((prev = next));^M$

ERROR: DOS line endings
#43: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c:265:
+^Ikfree(ring);^M$

total: 6 errors, 0 warnings, 20 lines checked

patches/xhci-fix-null-pointer-dereference-when-destroying-half-built-segment-rings.patch
has style problems, please review.

If any of these errors are false positives, please report
them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.

   I have noticed that the patch description has DOS line endings as well.

WBR, Sergei

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/