linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] ACPI: battery: Fix various string handling issues

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]

Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:45:30 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Armin Wolf <w_armin@....de>
Cc:     rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] ACPI: battery: Fix various string handling issues

On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:29 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:14 AM Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de> wrote:
> >
> > Am 19.01.23 um 15:21 schrieb Armin Wolf:
> >
> > > On my Dell Inspiron 3505, the battery model name was displayed
> > > differently than when running Windows. While i first suspected an
> > > ACPI issue, it turned out that the real reason was the ACPI battery
> > > driver failing to handle strings larger than 32 bytes.
> > >
> > > This caused the model name of the battery (35 bytes long, hex string)
> > > to miss proper NUL-termination, resulting in a buffer overread later.
> > > Luckily, a valid string was stored right after the now invalid string,
> > > appending only the battery serial number to the original model name.
> > >
> > > The first patch fixes a potential buffer overread then handling buffers,
> > > while the second patch finally increases the maximum string length to
> > > avoid truncating such larger strings.
> > >
> > > The patch series was tested on a Dell Inspiron 3505 and appears
> > > to work properly.
> >
> > Are there any outstanding issues with the patch series which need
> > to be fixed for mainline inclusion?
>
> I'll have a look shortly and let you know.

I've queued up the patches for 6.3, thanks!