linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: Let scsi_execute_cmd() mark args->sshdr as invalid

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: <fb0efbd1-a54f-09d6-bd27-6f665b461e58@acm.org>
Date:   Thu, 18 May 2023 12:54:27 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: Let scsi_execute_cmd() mark args->sshdr as invalid

On 5/18/23 03:57, John Garry wrote:
> I think it's better to fix up the callers.

+1

> Further to that, I dislike 
> how we pass a pointer to this local sshdr structure. I would prefer if 
> scsi_execute_cmd() could kmalloc() the mem for these buffers and the 
> callers could handle free'ing them - I can put together a patch for 
> that, to see what people think.

sizeof(struct scsi_sense_hdr) = 8. Using kmalloc() to allocate an eight 
byte data structure sounds like overkill to me. Additionally, making 
scsi_execute_cmd() allocate struct scsi_sense_hdr and letting the 
callers free that data structure will make it harder to review whether 
or not any memory leaks are triggered. No such review is necessary if 
the scsi_execute_cmd() caller allocates that data structure on the stack.

Bart.