linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] FS, NET: Fix KMSAN uninit-value in vfs

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: <20230320154053.x3h54b2s3r7iclby@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 16:40:53 +0100
From:   Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To:     Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
Cc:     Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, himadrispandya@...il.com,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        syzbot+c9bfd85eca611ebf5db1@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] FS, NET: Fix KMSAN uninit-value in vfs_write

On 14.03.2023 20:23:47, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> 
> 
> On 14.03.23 16:37, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> > On 3/14/23 18:38, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> > > Hello Ivan,
> > > 
> > > besides the fact that we would read some uninitialized value the
> > > outcome of the original implementation would have been an error and
> > > a termination of the copy process too. Maybe throwing a different
> > > error number.
> > > 
> > > But it is really interesting to see what KMSAN is able to detect
> > > these days! Many thanks for the finding and your effort to
> > > contribute this fix!
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > Oliver
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 14.03.23 13:04, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> > > > Syzkaller reported the following issue:
> > > 
> > > (..)
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Reported-by: syzbot+c9bfd85eca611ebf5db1@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> > > > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=47f897f8ad958bbde5790ebf389b5e7e0a345089
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@...il.com>
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > ---
> > > >   net/can/bcm.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> > > >   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/net/can/bcm.c b/net/can/bcm.c
> > > > index 27706f6ace34..a962ec2b8ba5 100644
> > > > --- a/net/can/bcm.c
> > > > +++ b/net/can/bcm.c
> > > > @@ -941,6 +941,8 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head
> > > > *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
> > > >               cf = op->frames + op->cfsiz * i;
> > > >               err = memcpy_from_msg((u8 *)cf, msg, op->cfsiz);
> > > > +            if (err < 0)
> > > > +                goto free_op;
> > > >               if (op->flags & CAN_FD_FRAME) {
> > > >                   if (cf->len > 64)
> > > > @@ -950,12 +952,8 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head
> > > > *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
> > > >                       err = -EINVAL;
> > > >               }
> > > > -            if (err < 0) {
> > > > -                if (op->frames != &op->sframe)
> > > > -                    kfree(op->frames);
> > > > -                kfree(op);
> > > > -                return err;
> > > > -            }
> > > > +            if (err < 0)
> > > > +                goto free_op;
> > > >               if (msg_head->flags & TX_CP_CAN_ID) {
> > > >                   /* copy can_id into frame */
> > > > @@ -1026,6 +1024,12 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct
> > > > bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
> > > >           bcm_tx_start_timer(op);
> > > >       return msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz + MHSIZ;
> > > > +
> > > > +free_op:
> > > > +    if (op->frames != &op->sframe)
> > > > +        kfree(op->frames);
> > > > +    kfree(op);
> > > > +    return err;
> > > >   }
> > > >   /*
> > 
> > Thank you for the quick answer! I totally agree that this patch will not
> > change the behavior a lot. However, I think a little bit more error
> > processing will not be bad (considering this will not bring any
> > performance overhead). If someone in the future tries to use the "cf"
> > object right after "memcpy_from_msg" call without proper error
> > processing it will lead to a bug (which will be hard to trigger). Maybe
> > fixing it now to avoid possible future mistakes in the future makes
> > sense?
> 
> Yes! Definitely!
> 
> Therefore I added my Acked-by: tag. Marc will likely pick this patch for
> upstream.

Can you create a proper Fixes tag?

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)