netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: ipv6: xfrm6

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]

Date:   Fri, 9 Mar 2018 14:02:20 +0100
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:     Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>
CC:     Andreas Christoforou <andreaschristofo@...il.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ipv6: xfrm6_state: remove VLA usage

On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 01:49:07PM +0100, Mathias Krause wrote:
> On 9 March 2018 at 13:21, Andreas Christoforou
> <andreaschristofo@...il.com> wrote:
> > The kernel would like to have all stack VLA usage removed[1].
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Christoforou <andreaschristofo@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  net/ipv6/xfrm6_state.c | 8 +++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/ipv6/xfrm6_state.c b/net/ipv6/xfrm6_state.c
> > index b15075a..45c0d98 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv6/xfrm6_state.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv6/xfrm6_state.c
> > @@ -62,7 +62,12 @@ __xfrm6_sort(void **dst, void **src, int n, int (*cmp)(void *p), int maxclass)
> >  {
> >         int i;
> >         int class[XFRM_MAX_DEPTH];
> > -       int count[maxclass];
> > +       int *count;
> > +
> > +       count = kcalloc(maxclass + 1, sizeof(*count), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +
> > +       if (!count)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >         memset(count, 0, sizeof(count));
> >
> > @@ -80,6 +85,7 @@ __xfrm6_sort(void **dst, void **src, int n, int (*cmp)(void *p), int maxclass)
> >                 src[i] = NULL;
> >         }
> >
> > +       kfree(count);
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> 
> Instead of dynamically allocating and freeing memory here, shouldn't
> we just get rid of the maxclass parameter and use XFRM_MAX_DEPTH as
> size for the count[] array, too?

Right, that's the way to go. Aside from that, allocating
with GFP_KERNEL is definitely wrong here.