[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7056f971-8fae-ce88-7e9a-7983e4f57bb2@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 12:33:17 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+5af9a90dad568aa9f611@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds Read in __nla_put_nohdr
On 1/22/20 12:27 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:55 AM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>> em_nbyte_change() sets
>> em->datalen = sizeof(*nbyte) + nbyte->len;
>>
>> But later tcf_em_validate() overwrites em->datalen with the user provide value (em->datalen = data_len; )
>> which can be bigger than the allocated (kmemdup) space in em_nbyte_change()
>>
>> Should net/sched/em_nbyte.c() provide a dump() handler to avoid this issue ?
>
> I think for those who implement ->change() we should leave
> ->datalen untouched to respect their choices. I don't see why
> we have to set it twice.
>
>
Agreed, but we need to audit them to make sure all of them are setting ->datalen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists