linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next] bpf: Fix latent unsoundness in and/or/xor value tracking

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 12:11:06 +0800
From: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@...e.com>
To: Harishankar Vishwanathan <hv90@...rutgers.edu>
Cc: Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>, 
	Harishankar Vishwanathan <harishankar.vishwanathan@...il.com>, Edward Cree <ecree@....com>, "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Harishankar Vishwanathan <harishankar.vishwanathan@...gers.edu>, "paul@...valent.com" <paul@...valent.com>, 
	Matan Shachnai <m.shachnai@...gers.edu>, Srinivas Narayana <srinivas.narayana@...gers.edu>, 
	Santosh Nagarakatte <santosh.nagarakatte@...gers.edu>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, 
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next] bpf: Fix latent unsoundness in and/or/xor
 value tracking

On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 12:05:18AM +0000, Harishankar Vishwanathan wrote:
> > On Apr 10, 2024, at 7:43 AM, Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@...e.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 06:17:05PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
> >> I don't feel too strongly about it, and if you or Shung-Hsi still
> >> think, on reflection, that backporting is desirable, then go ahead
> >> and keep the Fixes: tag.
> >> But maybe tweak the description so someone doesn't see "latent
> >> unsoundness" and think they need to CVE and rush this patch out as
> >> a security thing; it's more like hardening.  *shrug*
> >
> > Unfortunately with Linux Kernel's current approach as a CVE Numbering
> > Authority I don't think this can be avoided. Patches with fixes tag will
> > almost certainly get a CVE number assigned (e.g. CVE-2024-26624[1][2]),
> > and we can only dispute[3] after such assignment happend for the CVE to
> > be rejected.
> 
> It seems the best option is to CC the patch to stable@...r.kernel.org (so
> that it will be backported), and not add the fixes tag (so that no CVE will
> be assigned). Does this seem reasonable? If yes, I’ll proceed with v3.
> I'll also mention that this is a hardening in the commit message.

Sounds good to me. Not 100% certain that this will avoid CVE assignment,
but does seems like the best option.

Shung-Hsi