linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] block: add capacity validation in bdev_add

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: <20230616071729.GA29853@lst.de>
Date:   Fri, 16 Jun 2023 09:17:29 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     "min15.li" <min15.li@...sung.com>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, willy@...radead.org, hch@....de,
        dlemoal@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, wsa@...nel.org,
        vkoul@...nel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: add capacity validation in
 bdev_add_partition()

On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:05:57AM +0000, min15.li wrote:
> In the function bdev_add_partition(),there is no check that the start
> and end sectors exceed the size of the disk before calling add_partition.
> When we call the block's ioctl interface directly to add a partition,
> and the capacity of the disk is set to 0 by driver,the command will
> continue to execute.
> v1->v2: check for overflows of the start + length value and put
> the capacity check at the beginning of the function.
> 
> Signed-off-by: min15.li <min15.li@...sung.com>
> ---
>  block/partitions/core.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/block/partitions/core.c b/block/partitions/core.c
> index 49e0496ff23c..3546b43d5124 100644
> --- a/block/partitions/core.c
> +++ b/block/partitions/core.c
> @@ -438,8 +438,20 @@ int bdev_add_partition(struct gendisk *disk, int partno, sector_t start,
>  {
>  	struct block_device *part;
>  	int ret;
> +	sector_t end;
> +	sector_t capacity = get_capacity(disk);

Very minor nitpick, but I think this would read nicer as:

+	sector_t capacity = get_capacity(disk), end;
  	struct block_device *part;
  	int ret;

Otherwise this looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>