linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5.10/5.15] ata: libata-scsi: check cdb length for VARIABLE_LENGTH

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: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:44:43 +0900
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Mikhail Ukhin <mish.uxin2012@...dex.ru>,
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Jens Axboe
 <axboe@...nel.dk>, Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>,
 stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pavel Koshutin <koshutin.pavel@...dex.ru>,
 lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5.10/5.15] ata: libata-scsi: check cdb length for
 VARIABLE_LENGTH_CMD commands

On 6/28/24 5:08 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 11:02:23AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 6/27/24 06:13, Mikhail Ukhin wrote:
>>> Fuzzing of 5.10 stable branch reports a slab-out-of-bounds error in
>>> ata_scsi_pass_thru.
>>>
>>> The error is fixed in 5.18 by commit ce70fd9a551a ("scsi: core: Remove the
>>> cmd field from struct scsi_request") upstream.
>>> Backporting this commit would require significant changes to the code so
>>> it is bettter to use a simple fix for that particular error.
>>
>> This sentence is not needed in the commit message. That is a discussion to have
>> when applying (or not) the patch.
> 
> It's good to have this reasoning in the commit message to, so that later
> when we look at the patch and try to understand why we needed something
> custom for the backport, the justification will be right there.

OK then, let's keep the commit message as it is.

Mikhail,

Please send a v5 patch with the correction I commented and the patch will be
good to go.

Thanks !

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research