linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: Skylake: replace deprecated strncpy with strscpy

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: <202307281143.AE254E3A@keescook>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jul 2023 11:53:01 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Amadeusz Sławiński 
        <amadeuszx.slawinski@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     justinstitt@...gle.com,
        Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...ux.intel.com>,
        Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: Skylake: replace deprecated strncpy with
 strscpy

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 09:25:24AM +0200, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote:
> On 7/27/2023 12:34 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 09:12:18PM +0000, justinstitt@...gle.com wrote:
> > > `strncpy` is deprecated for use on NUL-terminated destination strings [1].
> > > 
> > > A suitable replacement is `strscpy` [2] due to the fact that it
> > > guarantees NUL-termination on its destination buffer argument which is
> > > _not_ the case for `strncpy`!
> > > 
> > > It was pretty difficult, in this case, to try and figure out whether or
> > > not the destination buffer was zero-initialized. If it is and this
> > > behavior is relied on then perhaps `strscpy_pad` is the preferred
> > > option here.
> > > 
> > > Kees was able to help me out and identify the following code snippet
> > > which seems to show that the destination buffer is zero-initialized.
> > > 
> > > |       skl = devm_kzalloc(&pci->dev, sizeof(*skl), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > 
> > > With this information, I opted for `strscpy` since padding is seemingly
> > > not required.
> > 
> > We did notice that str_elem->string is 44 bytes, but
> > skl->lib_info[ref_count].name is 128 bytes. If str_elem->string isn't
> > NUL-terminated, this can still hit an over-read condition (though
> > CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE would have caught it both before with strncpy()
> > and now with strscpy()). So I assume it is expected to be
> > NUL-terminated?
> > 
> 
> Yes it is a filename of additional library which can be loaded, topology
> UAPI only allows for passing 44 bytes long strings per string token (see
> snd_soc_tplg_vendor_array -> union -> string flex array ->
> snd_soc_tplg_vendor_string_elem -> SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ID_NAME_MAXLEN), so we

Thanks for the details! And just to confirm, these are (expected to be)
NUL-terminated?

> could also change length of
> skl->lib_info[ref_count].name and potentially save few bytes. And looking at
> it again I also think that we should not copy destination size number of
> bytes, by which I mean ARRAY_SIZE(skl->lib_info[ref_count].name), which is
> 128 in this case... so either need to change destination buffer size to be
> same as topology field or calculate it differently.

If the source is NUL-terminated, it's fine as-is. (And
CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE will catch problems if not.)

-- 
Kees Cook