[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fd4e6f01-074b-def7-7ffb-9a9197930c31@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2020 14:07:16 +0100
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
security@...nel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fbdev: potential information leak in do_fb_ioctl()
On 10/29/19 8:02 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> writes:
>
>> The "fix" struct has a 2 byte hole after ->ywrapstep and the
>> "fix = info->fix;" assignment doesn't necessarily clear it. It depends
>> on the compiler.
>>
>> Fixes: 1f5e31d7e55a ("fbmem: don't call copy_from/to_user() with mutex held")
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
>> ---
>> I have 13 more similar places to patch... I'm not totally sure I
>> understand all the issues involved.
>
> What I have done in a similar situation with struct siginfo, is that
> where the structure first appears I have initialized it with memset,
> and then field by field.
>
> Then when the structure is copied I copy the structure with memcpy.
>
> That ensures all of the bytes in the original structure are initialized
> and that all of the bytes are copied.
>
> The goal is to avoid memory that has values of the previous users of
> that memory region from leaking to userspace. Which depending on who
> the previous user of that memory region is could tell userspace
> information about what the kernel is doing that it should not be allowed
> to find out.
>
> I tried to trace through where "info" and thus presumably "info->fix" is
> coming from and only made it as far as register_framebuffer. Given
"info" (and thus "info->fix") comes from framebuffer_alloc() (which is
called by fbdev device drivers prior to registering "info" with
register_framebuffer()). framebuffer_alloc() does kzalloc() on "info".
Therefore shouldn't memcpy() (as suggested by Jeo Perches) be enough?
Best regards,
--
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
> that I suspect a local memset, and then a field by field copy right
> before copy_to_user might be a sound solution. But ick. That is a lot
> of fields to copy.
>
>
> Eric
>
>
>
>> drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
>> index 6f6fc785b545..b4ce6a28aed9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
>> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
>> @@ -1109,6 +1109,7 @@ static long do_fb_ioctl(struct fb_info *info, unsigned int cmd,
>> ret = -EFAULT;
>> break;
>> case FBIOGET_FSCREENINFO:
>> + memset(&fix, 0, sizeof(fix));
>> lock_fb_info(info);
>> fix = info->fix;
>> if (info->flags & FBINFO_HIDE_SMEM_START)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists