netdev - Re: [PATCH 9/9] udpv6: Check address length before reading address family

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <639b9e9a-dc4e-9e6d-7437-b66d6acd3a16@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date:   Sat, 13 Apr 2019 11:06:25 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To:     Andrey Ignatov <rdna@...com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Martin Lau <kafai@...com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] udpv6: Check address length before reading address
 family

On 2019/04/13 1:49, Andrey Ignatov wrote:
> Such a check wasn't added since it's already checked in
> inet_dgram_connect, the only place where udpv6_pre_connect is called:
> 
>   int inet_dgram_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr,
>                          int addr_len, int flags)
>   {
>           struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
>           int err;
>   
>           if (addr_len < sizeof(uaddr->sa_family))
>                   return -EINVAL;
>           if (uaddr->sa_family == AF_UNSPEC)
>                   return sk->sk_prot->disconnect(sk, flags);
>   
>           if (BPF_CGROUP_PRE_CONNECT_ENABLED(sk)) {
>                   err = sk->sk_prot->pre_connect(sk, uaddr, addr_len);
>                   if (err)
>                           return err;
>           }
> 
> So it's already handled. But if it helps KMSAN, that's probably fine to
> double-check it here. Or it's considered false positive?

OK, then KMSAN will not complain and this patch can be dropped.