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  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:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 12:05:19 -0400
From:   Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To:     Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Cc:     Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
        Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xprtrdma: Prevent inline overflow



> On Jul 15, 2020, at 11:56 AM, Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Static analysis with Coverity has found a potential issue with the
> header size calculations in source net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/rpc_rdma.c in
> functions rpcrdma_max_call_header_size and rpcrdma_max_reply_header_size.
> 
> The commit in question is relatively old:
> 
> commit 302d3deb20682a076e1ab551821cacfdc81c5e4f
> Author: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
> Date:   Mon May 2 14:41:05 2016 -0400
> 
>    xprtrdma: Prevent inline overflow
> 
> The two issues are as follows:
> 
> Issue #1:
> 
> 66 static unsigned int rpcrdma_max_call_header_size(unsigned int maxsegs)
> 67 {
> 68        unsigned int size;
> 69
> 70        /* Fixed header fields and list discriminators */
> 
> Unused value (UNUSED_VALUE)
> 
> 71        size = RPCRDMA_HDRLEN_MIN;
> 72
> 73        /* Maximum Read list size */
> 74        size = maxsegs * rpcrdma_readchunk_maxsz * sizeof(__be32);
> 75
> 
> should the size assignment on line 74 be instead:
> 
> 	size += maxsegs * rpcrdma_readchunk_maxsz * sizeof(__be32);
> 
> 
> Issue #2:
> 
> 89 static unsigned int rpcrdma_max_reply_header_size(unsigned int maxsegs)
> 90 {
> 91        unsigned int size;
> 92
> 93        /* Fixed header fields and list discriminators */
> 
> Unused value (UNUSED_VALUE)
> 
> 94        size = RPCRDMA_HDRLEN_MIN;
> 95
> 96        /* Maximum Write list size */
> 97        size = sizeof(__be32);          /* segment count */
> 
> should the size assignment in line 97 be instead:
> 
> 	size += sizeof(__be32)?

Colin, Yes to both questions. Can you send a fix to Anna?

--
Chuck Lever



Powered by blists - more mailing lists