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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2017 17:03:09 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Frans Klaver <fransklaver@...il.com>
cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Yueyao Zhu <yueyao.zhu@...il.com>,
        Rui Miguel Silva <rmfrfs@...il.com>,
        Guru Das Srinagesh <gurooodas@...il.com>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: endian bitshift defects [ was: staging: fusb302: don't bitshift
 __le16 type ]



On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Frans Klaver wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 07:37:28PM -0400, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 24 Jun 2017, Frans Klaver wrote:
> >
> > > Hm. For some reason the great mail filtering scheme decided to push
> > > this past my inbox :-/
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2017-06-16 at 19:45 +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> > > >> The header field in struct pd_message is declared as an __le16 type. The
> > > >> data in the message is supposed to be little endian. This means we don't
> > > >> have to go and shift the individual bytes into position when we're
> > > >> filling the buffer, we can just copy the contents right away. As an
> > > >> added benefit we don't get fishy results on big endian systems anymore.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for pointing this out.
> > > >
> > > > There are several instances of this class of error.
> > >
> > > There are other smells around __(le|be) types that show up in staging
> > > that might be worth checking in the rest of the kernel as well. e.g.
> > > converting to cpu and storing it back into itself (possibly with its
> > > bytes reversed), direct assignments without conversion and what else
> > > you might have. sparse obviously already flags anything fishy going on
> > > with these types, but cannot distinguish between the classes of
> > > errors. I'll need to acquaint myself with spatch a bit more to be able
> > > to track that down.
> >
> > If you have concrete code examples, even fake ones, illustrating a class
> > of problem, then that would be great.
>
> Alright, I'll describe two fairly simple cases for starters.
>
> One class of issue that I have on top of mind is simply
>
> 	__le16 val;
>
> 	val = le16_to_cpu(val);
>
> The problem there obviously being that val is supposed to be guaranteed
> little endian. Sparse will throw a warning at this. It may also appear
> as (or be 'fixed' as)
>
> 	__le16 val;
>
> 	le16_to_cpus(val);
>
> Sparse doesn't flag this second version as an issue, while it causes the
> same problem. It is especially a potential problem when the value is
> stored in driver data.
>
> Another smell that is prevalent, at least in staging, is
>
> 	u16 in;
> 	u16 out;
>
> 	out = cpu_to_le16(in);
>
> or in one instance (drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-io.c) I saw
>
> 	u64 tmp;
>
> 	*(u64*)dst = cpu_to_be64(tmp);
>
> Now these aren't necessarily problematic. Usually this typo of code is
> preparing the data to be sent out in a specific byte ordering, but again
> issues may arise if this specifically ordered data is stored somewhere.
>
> I'll leave it at that for now.

OK, thanks!

julia

Powered by blists - more mailing lists