linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Fix offset calculation error in __copy_map_value and zero_map

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:   Sat, 12 Nov 2022 01:05:09 +0530
From:   Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
To:     Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
        Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Fix offset calculation error in
 __copy_map_value and zero_map_value

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 06:26:20PM IST, Xu Kuohai wrote:
> From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@...wei.com>
>
> Function __copy_map_value and zero_map_value miscalculated copy offset,
> resulting in possible copy of unwanted data to user or kernel.
>
> Fix it.
>
> Fixes: cc48755808c6 ("bpf: Add zero_map_value to zero map value with special fields")
> Fixes: 4d7d7f69f4b1 ("bpf: Adapt copy_map_value for multiple offset case")
> Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@...wei.com>
> ---

Acked-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>

I also have a fix here for bpf-next, since this won't apply to it:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221111193224.876706-4-memxor@gmail.com

I think it'd be best if this one gets applied to bpf and mine to bpf-next, and
any conflicts are resolved when merging both trees (the conflict is trivial),
but I'll leave it up to the maintainers to decide.