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]
Message-ID: <YwMk6ESKt7fTEZuK@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 06:40:40 +0000
From:   Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>
To:     Rustam Subkhankulov <subkhankulov@...ras.ru>
Cc:     Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>,
        ldv-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/chrome: fix double-free in
 chromeos_laptop_prepare()

On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 08:05:13PM +0300, Rustam Subkhankulov wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-08-15 at 05:00 +0000, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> > Alternatively, I would prefer to fix the double-free by setting
> > `i2c_peripherals` to NULL after [1].
> 
> Since 'cros_laptop->num_i2c_peripherals' is assigned with nonzero value
> (otherwise the code on 'err_out' is not executed), setting 
> 'i2c_peripherals' to NULL after [1] will cause dereferencing of 
> NULL pointer in chromeos_laptop_destroy() at [2]. 
> 
> [1]:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c#L787
> [2]:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c#L860
> 
> > After a quick glance, I found an invalid memory access at [2] if
> > `i2c_peripherals` is NULL (see [3]). 
> 
> After applying the patch, there will be no invalid memory access at [2]
> if 'i2c_peripherals' is NULL, because in this situation 
> 'cros_laptop->num_i2c_peripherals' is zero and there is no single 
> iteration of the loop.

Thanks, I see.  I overlooked the `num_i2c_peripherals`.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ