[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180307205840.GA6242@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 12:58:40 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com
Cc: johan@...nel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] USB: serial: Add boundry check for read_urbs
array access
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 12:23:56PM -0800, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>
> In usb_serial_generic_submit_read_urb() function we are accessing the
> port->read_urbs array without any boundry checks. This might lead to
> kernel panic when index value goes above array length.
>
> One posible call path for this issue is,
>
> usb_serial_generic_read_bulk_callback()
> {
> ...
> if (!port->throttled) {
> usb_serial_generic_submit_read_urb(port, i, GFP_ATOMIC);
> ...
> }
How does i ever get to be greater than the array size here in this
function? It directly came from looking in that array in the first
place :)
So I don't see why your check is needed, what other code path would ever
call this function in a way that the bounds check would be needed?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists