linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 1/1] staging: rtl8192u: Add null check in rtl8192_usb

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]

Message-ID: <ZCX2qLN1g6bmeKS7@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Mar 2023 22:52:56 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Danila Chernetsov <listdansp@...l.ru>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 1/1] staging: rtl8192u: Add null check in
 rtl8192_usb_initendpoints

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 08:11:07PM +0000, Danila Chernetsov wrote:
> From: Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>
> 
> commit 4d5f81506835f7c1e5c71787bed84984faf05884 upstream.
> 
> There is an allocation for priv->rx_urb[16] has no null check,
> which may lead to a null pointer dereference.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201226080258.6576-1-dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Danila Chernetsov <listdansp@...l.ru>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
> index 7f90af8a7c7c..e0fec7d172da 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
> @@ -1608,6 +1608,8 @@ static short rtl8192_usb_initendpoints(struct net_device *dev)
>  		void *oldaddr, *newaddr;
>  
>  		priv->rx_urb[16] = usb_alloc_urb(0, GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!priv->rx_urb[16])
> +			return -ENOMEM;

This was not marked for stable as it's impossible to hit in real-life.
So absent that, it's not needed in any stable kernel tree, unless you
can prove otherwise?

thanks,

greg k-h