linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] media: venus: hfi_parser: add check to avoid out of bound access

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <975f4ecd-2029-469a-8ecf-fbd6397547d4@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:07:52 +0000
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
 Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@...cinc.com>
Cc: Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.k.varbanov@...il.com>,
 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] media: venus: hfi_parser: add check to avoid out of
 bound access

On 07/11/2024 10:41, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> init_codecs() parses the payload received from firmware and . I don't think we
>> can control this part when we have something like this from a malicious firmware
>> payload
>> HFI_PROPERTY_PARAM_CODEC_SUPPORTED
>> HFI_PROPERTY_PARAM_CODEC_SUPPORTED
>> HFI_PROPERTY_PARAM_CODEC_SUPPORTED
>> ...
>> Limiting it to second iteration would restrict the functionality when property
>> HFI_PROPERTY_PARAM_CODEC_SUPPORTED is sent for supported number of codecs.
> If you can have a malicious firmware (which is owned and signed by
> Qualcomm / OEM), then you have to be careful and skip duplicates. So
> instead of just adding new cap to core->caps, you have to go through
> that array, check that you are not adding a duplicate (and report a
> [Firmware Bug] for duplicates), check that there is an empty slot, etc.
> 
> Just ignoring the "extra" entries is not enough.

+1

This is a more rational argument. If you get a second message, you 
should surely reinit the whole array i.e. update the array with the new 
list, as opposed to throwing away the second message because it 
over-indexes your local storage..

---
bod