linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] remoteproc: Check for NULL firmwares in sysfs interface

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]

Date:   Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:05:58 -0500
From:   Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
To:     Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@...com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
CC:     Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
        Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@...com>,
        <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] remoteproc: Check for NULL firmwares in sysfs
 interface

Hi Arnaud,

On 10/02/2018 04:43 AM, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> Hi Suman,
> 
> On 09/15/2018 02:37 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>> The remoteproc framework provides a sysfs file 'firmware'
>> for modifying the firmware image name from userspace. Add
>> an additional check to ensure NULL firmwares are errored
>> out right away, rather than getting a delayed error while
>> requesting a firmware during the start of a remoteproc
>> later on.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
>> index 2142b3ea726e..ce93f4d710f3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
>> @@ -49,6 +49,11 @@ static ssize_t firmware_store(struct device *dev,
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	len = strcspn(buf, "\n");
>> +	if (!len) {
>> +		dev_err(dev, "can't provide a NULL firmware\n");
>> +		err = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}

> This patch fixes only the case of a null name but not a bad name. So I'm
> not one hundred percent sure that it is relevant, as it treats only a
> part of the problem. But it's fine with me if it is accepted.

Yeah, it is a minor fix catching only NULL names. There is no way for
the interface to know a bad name until the corresponding firmware is
requested.

regards
Suman

> 
> Tested-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@...com>
> 
> Regards
> Arnaud
> 
>>  
>>  	p = kstrndup(buf, len, GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!p) {
>>