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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 09:32:33 +0200 From: Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@....com> To: Ajay.Kathat@...rochip.com Cc: oscar.carter@....com, adham.abozaeid@...rochip.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rachel.kim@...el.com, johnny.kim@...el.com, chris.park@...el.com, dean.lee@...el.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: Increase the size of wid_list array On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 06:26:10PM +0000, Ajay.Kathat@...rochip.com wrote: > > On 01/05/20 10:32 pm, Oscar Carter wrote: > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > > > Increase by one the size of wid_list array as index variable can reach a > > value of 5. If this happens, an out-of-bounds access is performed. > > > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1451981 ("Out-of-bounds access") > > Fixes: c5c77ba18ea66 ("staging: wilc1000: Add SDIO/SPI 802.11 driver") > > The code changes are fine. But the correct commit for Fixes tag should be > > Fixes: f5a3cb90b802d ("staging: wilc1000: add passive scan support") > Sorry for the mistake. I will make the change and I will send a new version. > > Regards, > Ajay > > > Signed-off-by: Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@....com> > > --- > > drivers/staging/wilc1000/hif.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/hif.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/hif.c > > index 6c7de2f8d3f2..128943c3be4f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/hif.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/hif.c > > @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ int wilc_scan(struct wilc_vif *vif, u8 scan_source, u8 scan_type, > > void *user_arg, struct cfg80211_scan_request *request) > > { > > int result = 0; > > - struct wid wid_list[5]; > > + struct wid wid_list[6]; > > u32 index = 0; > > u32 i, scan_timeout; > > u8 *buffer; > > -- > > 2.20.1 > > Thanks, Oscar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists