[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bfa368ff-f9b0-4944-9988-96438b965299@embeddedor.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 11:11:42 -0600
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org, error27@...il.com,
gustavoars@...nel.org, Bryan Tan <bryantan@...are.com>,
Vishnu Dasa <vdasa@...are.com>,
VMware PV-Drivers Reviewers <pv-drivers@...are.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: vegard.nossum@...cle.com, darren.kenny@...cle.com,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] VMCI: Fix memcpy() run-time warning in
dg_dispatch_as_host()
On 1/5/24 10:40, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote:
> Syzkaller hit 'WARNING in dg_dispatch_as_host' bug.
>
> memcpy: detected field-spanning write (size 56) of single field "&dg_info->msg"
> at drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c:237 (size 24)
>
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1555 at drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c:237
> dg_dispatch_as_host+0x88e/0xa60 drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c:237
>
> Some code commentry, based on my understanding:
>
> 544 #define VMCI_DG_SIZE(_dg) (VMCI_DG_HEADERSIZE + (size_t)(_dg)->payload_size)
> /// This is 24 + payload_size
>
> memcpy(&dg_info->msg, dg, dg_size);
> Destination = dg_info->msg ---> this is a 24 byte
> structure(struct vmci_datagram)
> Source = dg --> this is a 24 byte structure (struct vmci_datagram)
> Size = dg_size = 24 + payload_size
>
> {payload_size = 56-24 =32} -- Syzkaller managed to set payload_size to 32.
>
> 35 struct delayed_datagram_info {
> 36 struct datagram_entry *entry;
> 37 struct work_struct work;
> 38 bool in_dg_host_queue;
> 39 /* msg and msg_payload must be together. */
> 40 struct vmci_datagram msg;
> 41 u8 msg_payload[];
> 42 };
>
> So those extra bytes of payload are copied into msg_payload[], a run time
> warning is seen while fuzzing with Syzkaller.
>
> One possible way to fix the warning is to split the memcpy() into
> two parts -- one -- direct assignment of msg and second taking care of payload.
>
> Gustavo quoted:
> "Under FORTIFY_SOURCE we should not copy data across multiple members
> in a structure."
>
> Reported-by: syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
> Suggested-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>
> Suggested-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Thanks!
--
Gustavo
> ---
> This patch is only tested with the C reproducer, not any testing
> specific to driver is done.
>
> v1->v2: ( Suggestions from Gustavo )
> 1. Change the commit message false positive --> legitimate
> warning.
> 2. Remove unneeded payload_size variable.
> 3. Replace first memcpy() with direct assignment.
> ---
> drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c b/drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c
> index ac6cb0c8d99b..ba379cd6d054 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_datagram.c
> @@ -234,7 +234,8 @@ static int dg_dispatch_as_host(u32 context_id, struct vmci_datagram *dg)
>
> dg_info->in_dg_host_queue = true;
> dg_info->entry = dst_entry;
> - memcpy(&dg_info->msg, dg, dg_size);
> + dg_info->msg = *dg;
> + memcpy(&dg_info->msg_payload, dg + 1, dg->payload_size);
>
> INIT_WORK(&dg_info->work, dg_delayed_dispatch);
> schedule_work(&dg_info->work);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists