linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] qed: fix uninit pointer read in qed_mcp_nvm_info

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: <cdbe92eb-0d35-457b-b661-d7aaf4026984@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 13:13:12 +0100
From: Gianfranco Trad <gianf.trad@...il.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: manishc@...vell.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 skhan@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qed: fix uninit pointer read in
 qed_mcp_nvm_info_populate()

On 12/12/24 18:04, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 02:40:42PM +0100, Gianfranco Trad wrote:
>> Coverity reports an uninit pointer read in qed_mcp_nvm_info_populate().
>> If qed_mcp_bist_nvm_get_num_images() returns -EOPNOTSUPP, this leads to
>> jump to label out with nvm_info.image_att being uninit while assigning it
>> to p_hwfn->nvm_info.image_att.
>> Add check on rc against -EOPNOTSUPP to avoid such uninit pointer read.
>>
>> Closes: https://scan5.scan.coverity.com/#/project-view/63204/10063?selectedIssue=1636666
>> Signed-off-by: Gianfranco Trad <gianf.trad@...il.com>
>> ---
>> Note:
>> - Fixes: tag should be "7a0ea70da56e net/qed: allow old cards not supporting "num_images" to work" ?
>>    
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c
>> index b45efc272fdb..127943b39f61 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c
>> @@ -3387,7 +3387,7 @@ int qed_mcp_nvm_info_populate(struct qed_hwfn *p_hwfn)
>>   	}
>>   out:
>>   	/* Update hwfn's nvm_info */
>> -	if (nvm_info.num_images) {
>> +	if (nvm_info.num_images && rc != -EOPNOTSUPP) {
>>   		p_hwfn->nvm_info.num_images = nvm_info.num_images;
>>   		kfree(p_hwfn->nvm_info.image_att);
>>   		p_hwfn->nvm_info.image_att = nvm_info.image_att;
> 

Hi Simon,

> Are you sure that nvm_info.num_images can be non-zero if rc == -EOPNOTSUPP?
>

In the coverity report, the static analyzer is able to take the true 
branch on nvm_info.num_images. I didn't physically reproduce this 
logical state as I don't possess the matching hardware.

> The cited commit state:
> 
>      Commit 43645ce03e00 ("qed: Populate nvm image attribute shadow.")
>      added support for populating flash image attributes, notably
>      "num_images". However, some cards were not able to return this
>      information. In such cases, the driver would return EINVAL, causing the
>      driver to exit.
> 
>      Add check to return EOPNOTSUPP instead of EINVAL when the card is not
>      able to return these information. The caller function already handles
>      EOPNOTSUPP without error.
> 
> So I would expect that nvm_info.num_images is 0.
> 
> If not, perhaps an alternate fix is to make that so, either by setting
> it in qed_mcp_bist_nvm_get_num_images, or where the return value of
> qed_mcp_bist_nvm_get_num_images is checked (just before the goto out).
>

Makes sense, so something like this I suppose:

--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_mcp.c
@@ -3301,8 +3301,10 @@ int qed_mcp_bist_nvm_get_num_images(struct 
qed_hwfn *p_hwfn,
   	if (rc)
   		return rc;

-	if (((rsp & FW_MSG_CODE_MASK) == FW_MSG_CODE_UNSUPPORTED))
+	if (((rsp & FW_MSG_CODE_MASK) == FW_MSG_CODE_UNSUPPORTED)) {
+		*num_images = 0;
   		rc = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+	}

Or the second option you stated.

> And, in any case I think some testing is in order.

I strongly agree. Let me know if I can help more with this.

Thanks for your time,
--Gian