linux-kernel - Re: md: fix missing check on list iterator

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220403035603.16169-1-xiam0nd.tong@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun,  3 Apr 2022 11:56:03 +0800
From:   Xiaomeng Tong <xiam0nd.tong@...il.com>
To:     snitzer@...hat.com
Cc:     agk@...hat.com, dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, xiam0nd.tong@...il.com
Subject: Re: md: fix missing check on list iterator

On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:47:18 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> Did you acually hit a bug (invalid memory access)?
> 
> I cannot see how given the checks prior to iterating m->priority_groups:
> 
>         if (!pgstr || (sscanf(pgstr, "%u%c", &pgnum, &dummy) != 1) || !pgnum ||
>             !m->nr_priority_groups || (pgnum > m->nr_priority_groups)) {
>                 DMWARN("invalid PG number supplied to bypass_pg");
>                 return -EINVAL;
>         }
> 
> So I have _not_ taken your "fix".

Yes, you are correct. It has been checked before, thus not a bug and
no need to fix. And I have sent a PATCH v2 to use list iterator only
inside the loop, please check it. Thank you very much.

--
Xiaomeng Tong