[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9c742547-0021-464b-b7a8-7af46b0a4afa@embeddedor.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 20:05:38 -0600
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.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, 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 1/8/24 16:37, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 08:40:00AM -0800, 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>
>
> Thanks for getting this fixed!
>
> Yeah, it's a "false positive" in the sense that the code was expecting
It's a false positive _bug_, and a legitimate _warning_ coming from fortified
memcpy().
> to write into msg_payload. The warning is triggered because of the write
> across the flex array boundary, which trips a bug in GCC and Clang,
> which we're forced to work around.
The warning is triggered because of a write beyond the boundaries of
`dg_info->msg`. It's not directly related to the fact that there is a
flexible-array member following `dg_info->msg`.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101832 (fixed in GCC 14+)
> (not yet fixed in Clang)
This issue is not related to the compiler bugs mentioned above.
>
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>
Thanks!
--
Gustavo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists