linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.18 56/92] libata: array underflow in ata_find

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: <20170809202157.832970046@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Wed,  9 Aug 2017 13:37:24 -0700
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3.18 56/92] libata: array underflow in ata_find_dev()

3.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>

commit 59a5e266c3f5c1567508888dd61a45b86daed0fa upstream.

My static checker complains that "devno" can be negative, meaning that
we read before the start of the loop.  I've looked at the code, and I
think the warning is right.  This come from /proc so it's root only or
it would be quite a quite a serious bug.  The call tree looks like this:

proc_scsi_write() <- gets id and channel from simple_strtoul()
-> scsi_add_single_device() <- calls shost->transportt->user_scan()
   -> ata_scsi_user_scan()
      -> ata_find_dev()

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c |    6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -2798,10 +2798,12 @@ static unsigned int atapi_xlat(struct at
 static struct ata_device *ata_find_dev(struct ata_port *ap, int devno)
 {
 	if (!sata_pmp_attached(ap)) {
-		if (likely(devno < ata_link_max_devices(&ap->link)))
+		if (likely(devno >= 0 &&
+			   devno < ata_link_max_devices(&ap->link)))
 			return &ap->link.device[devno];
 	} else {
-		if (likely(devno < ap->nr_pmp_links))
+		if (likely(devno >= 0 &&
+			   devno < ap->nr_pmp_links))
 			return &ap->pmp_link[devno].device[0];
 	}