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  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]
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2017 17:04:16 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc:     herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
        harsh@...lsio.com, hariprasad@...lsio.com,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] crypto: chcr - Fix error checking

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 02:14:30PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> If 'chcr_alloc_shash()' a few lines above fails, 'base_hash' can be an
> error pointer when we 'goto out'.
> So checking for NULL here is not enough because it is likely that
> 'chcr_free_shash' will crash if we pass an error pointer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
> ---
> Another solution, amybe safer, would be to instrument 'chcr_free_shash' or
> 'crypto_free_shash' to accept an error pointer and return immediatelly in
> such a case.
> ---
>  drivers/crypto/chelsio/chcr_algo.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/chelsio/chcr_algo.c b/drivers/crypto/chelsio/chcr_algo.c
> index f19590ac8775..41750b97f43c 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/chelsio/chcr_algo.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/chelsio/chcr_algo.c
> @@ -2351,7 +2351,7 @@ static int chcr_authenc_setkey(struct crypto_aead *authenc, const u8 *key,
>  	}
>  out:
>  	aeadctx->enckey_len = 0;
> -	if (base_hash)
> +	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(base_hash))
>  		chcr_free_shash(base_hash);

Ah...  Ok.  Fine, but redo the first patch anyway because it shouldn't
ever be NULL.

regards,
dan carpenter


Powered by blists - more mailing lists