linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] trace: acquire buffer from temparary trace sequence

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: <e2735a3a-4a9b-8b3a-0671-b3f56187cbe2@quicinc.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:06:22 +0800
From:   Linyu Yuan <quic_linyyuan@...cinc.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] trace: acquire buffer from temparary trace sequence


On 1/31/2023 3:30 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:14:01 +0800
> Linyu Yuan <quic_linyyuan@...cinc.com> wrote:
>
>> @Steven current design is not safe, as user still can write to buffer
>> which have no enough space.
> I'm assuming that it would never use more that DWC3_MSG_MAX, and that's set
> to 500. The size of the trace_seq() is 4096 (or PAGE_SIZE), I doubt it will
> ever be an issue.
>
> How do you think the user can still write more than enough?


yes, agree it will be safe for dwc3, but i don't know if any possible 
hacker,

as the function always return a valid pointer even when hacker input a 
large size.


>
> -- Steve
>
>> do you think it is better to improve dwc3 trace in fast assign path ?
>>
>