linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] rust: harden index manipulation using ownership

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]

Message-ID: <CAH5fLgi4YNsLHFoKw7UsGbmpEaqeG4o5yMQAodZ1KwfExAPL3w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 12:57:47 +0200
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, 
	Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rust: harden index manipulation using ownership

On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 1:16 AM Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 5:01 PM Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > +//! Utilities for working with ranges of indices.
> > +
> > +/// A range of indices.
> > +///
> > +/// This utility is useful for ensuring that no index in the range is used more than once.
> > +#[derive(Debug)]
> > +pub struct Range {
> > +    offset: usize,
> > +    length: usize,
> > +}
>
> Would a name like "DataRange" or "CheckedRange" be better here, to
> avoid confusion with core::ops::Range?

Probably a good idea. I've had collisions on those types.

> > +    /// Use this range of indices.
> > +    ///
> > +    /// This destroys the `Range` object, so these indices cannot be used again after this call.
> > +    pub fn use_range(self) -> UsedRange {
>
> Maybe just `.use()`?

Makes sense to me.

> > +    /// Assert that this range is aligned properly.
> > +    pub fn assert_aligned(&self, alignment: usize) -> Result<(), RangeError> {
>
> It would probably be good to warn that this alignment is relative to
> the offset, i.e. if you split a range at an unaligned point then this
> may not be useful.
>
> This is a pretty cool API idea.

Thanks!

Alice