netdev - Re: KASAN: use-after-free Read in hci_chan

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:   Sat, 5 Jun 2021 09:43:43 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     SyzScope <syzscope@...il.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, johan.hedberg@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        marcel@...tmann.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: KASAN: use-after-free Read in hci_chan_del

On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 10:11:03AM -0700, SyzScope wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> > Who is working on and doing this "reseach project"?
> We are a group of researchers from University of California, Riverside (we
> introduced ourselves in an earlier email to security@...nel.org if you
> recall).

I do not recall that, sorry, when was that?

> Please allow us to articulate the goal of our research. We'd be
> happy to hear your feedback and suggestions.
> 
> > And what is it
> > doing to actually fix the issues that syzbot finds?  Seems like that
> > would be a better solution instead of just trying to send emails saying,
> > in short "why isn't this reported issue fixed yet?"
> From our limited understanding, we know a key problem with syzbot bugs is
> that there are too many of them - more than what can be handled by
> developers and maintainers. Therefore, it seems some form of prioritization
> on bug fixing would be helpful. The goal of the SyzScope project is to
> *automatically* analyze the security impact of syzbot bugs, which helps with
> prioritizing bug fixes. In other words, when a syzbot bug is reported, we
> aim to attach a corresponding security impact "signal" to help developers
> make an informed decision on which ones to fix first.

Is that really the reason why syzbot-reported problems are not being
fixed?  Just because we don't know which ones are more "important"?

As someone who has been managing many interns for a year or so working
on these, I do not think that is the problem, but hey, what do I know...

> Currently,  SyzScope is a standalone prototype system that we plan to open
> source. We hope to keep developing it to make it more and more useful and
> have it eventually integrated into syzbot (we are in talks with Dmitry).
> 
> We are happy to talk more offline (perhaps even in a zoom meeting if you
> would like). Thanks in advance for any feedback and suggestions you may
> have.

Meetings are not really how kernel development works, sorry.

At the moment, these emails really do not seem all that useful, trying
to tell other people what to do does not get you very far when dealing
with people who you have no "authority" over...

Technical solutions to human issues almost never work, however writing a
procmail filter to keep me from having to see these will work quite well :)

good luck!

greg k-h