linux-kernel - Re: net/can: warning in raw_setsockopt/__alloc_pages

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: <73b78023-bc11-25c0-33e3-3a748dbc81cd@hartkopp.net>
Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2016 16:11:41 +0100
From:   Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: net/can: warning in raw_setsockopt/__alloc_pages_slowpath



On 12/02/2016 02:24 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 12/02/2016 01:43 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:


>>  [<ffffffff8369e0de>] raw_setsockopt+0x1be/0x9f0 net/can/raw.c:506
>
> We should add a check for a sensible optlen....
>
>> static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
>> 			  char __user *optval, unsigned int optlen)
>> {
>> 	struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
>> 	struct raw_sock *ro = raw_sk(sk);
>> 	struct can_filter *filter = NULL;  /* dyn. alloc'ed filters */
>> 	struct can_filter sfilter;         /* single filter */
>> 	struct net_device *dev = NULL;
>> 	can_err_mask_t err_mask = 0;
>> 	int count = 0;
>> 	int err = 0;
>>
>> 	if (level != SOL_CAN_RAW)
>> 		return -EINVAL;
>>
>> 	switch (optname) {
>>
>> 	case CAN_RAW_FILTER:
>> 		if (optlen % sizeof(struct can_filter) != 0)
>> 			return -EINVAL;
>
> here...
>
> 		if (optlen > 64 * sizeof(struct can_filter))
> 			return -EINVAL;
>

Agreed.

But what is sensible here?
64 filters is way to small IMO.

When thinking about picking a bunch of single CAN IDs I would tend to 
something like 512 filters.

Regards,
Oliver

>>
>> 		count = optlen / sizeof(struct can_filter);
>>
>> 		if (count > 1) {
>> 			/* filter does not fit into dfilter => alloc space */
>> 			filter = memdup_user(optval, optlen);
>> 			if (IS_ERR(filter))
>> 				return PTR_ERR(filter);
>> 		} else if (count == 1) {
>> 			if (copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, sizeof(sfilter)))
>> 				return -EFAULT;
>> 		}
>>
>> 		lock_sock(sk);
>
> Marc
>