[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b7c7fab7-07d5-4654-a903-473f0c6dd4aa@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 11:07:49 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Ryosuke Yasuoka <ryasuoka@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
syoshida@...hat.com, syzbot+d7b4dc6cd50410152534@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3] nfc: nci: Fix uninit-value in nci_rx_work
On 02/05/2024 10:22, Ryosuke Yasuoka wrote:
> syzbot reported the following uninit-value access issue [1]
>
> nci_rx_work() parses received packet from ndev->rx_q. It should be
> validated header size, payload size and total packet size before
> processing the packet. If an invalid packet is detected, it should be
> silently discarded.
>
> Fixes: d24b03535e5e ("nfc: nci: Fix uninit-value in nci_dev_up and nci_ntf_packet")
> Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+d7b4dc6cd50410152534@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=d7b4dc6cd50410152534 [1]
> Signed-off-by: Ryosuke Yasuoka <ryasuoka@...hat.com>
> ---
>
> v3
> - As Simon pointed out, the valid packets will reach invalid_pkt_free
> and kfree_skb(skb) after being handled correctly in switch statement.
> It can lead to double free issues, which is not intended. So this patch
> uses "continue" instead of "break" in switch statement.
>
> - In the current implementation, once zero payload size is detected, the
> for statement exits. It should continue processing subsequent packets.
> So this patch just frees skb in invalid_pkt_free when the invalid
> packets are detected.
>
> v2
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240428134525.GW516117@kernel.org/T/
>
> - The v1 patch only checked whether skb->len is zero. This patch also
> checks header size, payload size and total packet size.
>
>
> v1
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/CANn89iJrQevxPFLCj2P=U+XSisYD0jqrUQpa=zWMXTjj5+RriA@mail.gmail.com/T/
>
>
> net/nfc/nci/core.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/core.c b/net/nfc/nci/core.c
> index 0d26c8ec9993..e4f92a090022 100644
> --- a/net/nfc/nci/core.c
> +++ b/net/nfc/nci/core.c
> @@ -1463,6 +1463,16 @@ int nci_core_ntf_packet(struct nci_dev *ndev, __u16 opcode,
> ndev->ops->n_core_ops);
> }
>
> +static bool nci_valid_size(struct sk_buff *skb, unsigned int header_size)
> +{
> + if (skb->len < header_size ||
> + !nci_plen(skb->data) ||
> + skb->len < header_size + nci_plen(skb->data)) {
> + return false;
> + }
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /* ---- NCI TX Data worker thread ---- */
>
> static void nci_tx_work(struct work_struct *work)
> @@ -1516,30 +1526,35 @@ static void nci_rx_work(struct work_struct *work)
> nfc_send_to_raw_sock(ndev->nfc_dev, skb,
> RAW_PAYLOAD_NCI, NFC_DIRECTION_RX);
>
> - if (!nci_plen(skb->data)) {
> - kfree_skb(skb);
> - break;
> - }
> + if (!skb->len)
> + goto invalid_pkt_free;
>
> /* Process frame */
> switch (nci_mt(skb->data)) {
> case NCI_MT_RSP_PKT:
> + if (!nci_valid_size(skb, NCI_CTRL_HDR_SIZE))
> + goto invalid_pkt_free;
> nci_rsp_packet(ndev, skb);
> - break;
> + continue;
I don't find this code readable.
>
> case NCI_MT_NTF_PKT:
> + if (!nci_valid_size(skb, NCI_CTRL_HDR_SIZE))
> + goto invalid_pkt_free;
> nci_ntf_packet(ndev, skb);
> - break;
> + continue;
>
> case NCI_MT_DATA_PKT:
> + if (!nci_valid_size(skb, NCI_DATA_HDR_SIZE))
> + goto invalid_pkt_free;
> nci_rx_data_packet(ndev, skb);
> - break;
> + continue;
>
> default:
> pr_err("unknown MT 0x%x\n", nci_mt(skb->data));
> - kfree_skb(skb);
> - break;
> + goto invalid_pkt_free;
> }
> +invalid_pkt_free:
> + kfree_skb(skb);
Why you cannot kfree in "default" and error cases? I don't think that
goto inside loop makes this code easier to follow.
> }
>
> /* check if a data exchange timeout has occurred */
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists