linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] iter revert problems

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:   Fri, 3 Sep 2021 14:55:26 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Palash Oswal <oswalpalash@...il.com>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+9671693590ef5aad8953@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] iter revert problems

On 8/23/21 4:18 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> iov_iter_revert() doesn't go well with iov_iter_truncate() in all
> cases, see 2/2 for the bug description. As mentioned there the current
> problems is because of generic_write_checks(), but there was also a
> similar case fixed in 5.12, which should have been triggerable by normal
> write(2)/read(2) and others.
> 
> It may be better to enforce reexpands as a long term solution, but for
> now this patchset is quickier and easier to backport.
> 
> v2: don't fail if it was justly fully reverted
> v3: use truncated size + reexapand based approach

Al, let's get this upstream. How do you want to handle it? I can take
it through the io_uring tree, or it can go through your tree. I really
don't care which route it takes, but we should get this upstream as
it solves a real problem.

-- 
Jens Axboe