[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD-N9QW-zm37f9PW-iF-NaAH5LLePWFba3aG5LkXD2a07YBZpg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:04:44 +0800
From: 慕冬亮 <mudongliangabcd@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, mchehab@...nel.org, sean@...s.org,
anant.thazhemadam@...il.com,
syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: "UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in mceusb_dev_recv" should share the same
root cause with "UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in mceusb_dev_printdata"
Hi developers,
I found that "UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in mceusb_dev_recv" and
"UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in mceusb_dev_printdata" should share the
same root cause.
The reason is that the PoCs after minimization has a high similarity
with the other. And their stack trace only diverges at the last
function call. The following is some analysis for this bug.
The following code in the mceusb_process_ir_data is the vulnerable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
for (; i < buf_len; i++) {
switch (ir->parser_state) {
case SUBCMD:
ir->rem = mceusb_cmd_datasize(ir->cmd, ir->buf_in[i]);
mceusb_dev_printdata(ir, ir->buf_in, buf_len, i - 1,
ir->rem + 2, false);
if (i + ir->rem < buf_len)
mceusb_handle_command(ir, &ir->buf_in[i - 1]);
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first report crashes at a shift operation(1<<*hi) in mceusb_handle_command.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
static void mceusb_handle_command(struct mceusb_dev *ir, u8 *buf_in)
{
u8 *hi = &buf_in[2]; /* read only when required */
if (cmd == MCE_CMD_PORT_SYS) {
switch (subcmd) {
case MCE_RSP_GETPORTSTATUS:
if (buf_in[5] == 0)
ir->txports_cabled |= 1 << *hi;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second report crashes at another shift operation (1U << data[0])
in mceusb_dev_printdata.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
static void mceusb_dev_printdata(struct mceusb_dev *ir, u8 *buf, int buf_len,
int offset, int len, bool out)
{
data = &buf[offset] + 2;
period = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST((1U << data[0] * 2) *
(data[1] + 1), 10);
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From the analysis, we can know the data[0] and *hi access the same
memory cell - ``ir->buf_in[i+1]``. So the root cause should be that it
misses the check of ir->buf_in[i+1].
For the patch of this bug, there is one from anant.thazhemadam@...il.com:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/mceusb.c b/drivers/media/rc/mceusb.c
index f1dbd059ed08..79de721b1c4a 100644
--- a/drivers/media/rc/mceusb.c
+++ b/drivers/media/rc/mceusb.c
@@ -1169,7 +1169,7 @@ static void mceusb_handle_command(struct
mceusb_dev *ir, u8 *buf_in)
switch (subcmd) {
/* the one and only 5-byte return value command */
case MCE_RSP_GETPORTSTATUS:
- if (buf_in[5] == 0)
+ if ((buf_in[5] == 0) && (*hi <= 32))
ir->txports_cabled |= 1 << *hi;
break;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried this patch in the second crash report and found it does not
work. I think we should add another filter for the value in
``ir->buf_in[i+1]``.
With this grouping, I think developers can take into consideration the
issue in mceusb_dev_printdata and generate a complete patch for this
bug.
If any of my understanding is incorrect or has issues, please let me
know. Thanks very much.
--
My best regards to you.
No System Is Safe!
Dongliang Mu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists