[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53A80A27.5090503@imgtec.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 12:06:15 +0100
From: Markos Chandras <Markos.Chandras@...tec.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
"linux-mips@...ux-mips.org" <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/17] MIPS: bpf: Prevent kernel fall over for >=32bit
shifts
On 06/23/2014 10:44 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Markos Chandras
>> Remove BUG_ON() if the shift immediate is >=32 to avoid
>> kernel crashes due to malicious user input. Since the micro-assembler
>> will not allow an immediate greater or equal to 32, we will use the
>> maximum value which is 31. This will do the correct thing on either 32-
>> or 64-bit cores since no 64-bit instructions are being used in JIT.
>
> I'm not sure that bounding the shift to 31 bits 'is the correct thing'.
> I'd have thought that emulating the large shift or masking the shift
> to 5 bits are equally 'correct'.
>
> ...
Hi David,
Since we use 32-bit registers (or rather, we ignore the top 32bits on
MIPS64), shifting >= 32 will always result to 0.
Alexei suggested [1] to allow large shifts and emulate them, so this
patch aims to do that by treating >=32 shift values as 31. Please tell
me if I got this wrong.
[1] http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2014-06/msg00212.html
--
markos
--
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