[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BF96EA7.9050101@iki.fi>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 21:06:31 +0300
From: Timo Teräs <timo.teras@....fi>
To: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bug report: xfrm: potential null deref in xfrm_bundle_lookup()
On 05/22/2010 11:24 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> This is a smatch thing. I couldn't tell if it was a real issue so I
> thought I would send this mail to the experts. :)
>
> net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c +1679 xfrm_bundle_lookup(51)
> error: we previously assumed 'xdst' could be null.
> 1672 new_xdst = xfrm_resolve_and_create_bundle(pols, num_pols, fl, family, dst_orig);
> 1673 if (IS_ERR(new_xdst)) {
> 1674 err = PTR_ERR(new_xdst);
> 1675 if (err != -EAGAIN)
> 1676 goto error;
> 1677 if (oldflo == NULL)
> 1678 goto make_dummy_bundle;
> 1679 dst_hold(&xdst->u.dst);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
> Can xdst be NULL here? It would have to be something like
> oldflo gets passed in as null and __xfrm_policy_lookup() fails.
No. xdst and oldflo point to same data structure, just to different
offset (and data type). If oldflo is not null, xdst is not either. See
their initialization around lines 1640. Since oldflo is explicitly
tested for not being null, xdst is valid too.
It might make this more obvious if we tested xdst for NULL instead of
oldflo, though.
- Timo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists