netdev - Re: [PATCH] netlink: add policy attribute range validation

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: <1537993066.28767.29.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 22:17:46 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netlink: add policy attribute range validation

On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 22:06 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
> 
> Without further bloating the policy structs, we can overload
> the `validation_data' pointer with a struct of s16 min, max
> and use those to validate ranges in NLA_{U,S}{8,16,32,64}
> attributes.
> 
> It may sound strange to validate NLA_U32 with a s16 max, but
> in many cases NLA_U32 is used for enums etc. since there's no
> size benefit in using a smaller attribute width anyway, due
> to netlink attribute alignment; in cases like that it's still
> useful, particularly when the attribute really transports an
> enum value.

That said, I did find a few places where we could benefit from a larger
type here - e.g. having a NLA_U16 that must be non-zero cannot be
represented in the policy as is, since you can't set max to 65535.

However, I don't think we want to push the policy struct to 12 bytes on
32-bit platforms? It's currently 16 bytes on 64-bit due to the pointer
(and alignment), but only 8 bytes on 32-bit.

Keeping the few places that needed this validation is unlikely to be a
larger win than the policy size increase due to the larger type.

johannes