netdev - Re: [PATCH 02/64] mac80211: Use flex-array for radiotap header bitmap

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <202107281602.4D9ED671@keescook>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jul 2021 16:14:35 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        Keith Packard <keithpac@...zon.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/64] mac80211: Use flex-array for radiotap header bitmap

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 10:35:56AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 01:57:53PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > In preparation for FORTIFY_SOURCE performing compile-time and run-time
> > field bounds checking for memcpy(), memmove(), and memset(), avoid
> > intentionally writing across neighboring fields.
> > 
> > The it_present member of struct ieee80211_radiotap_header is treated as a
> > flexible array (multiple u32s can be conditionally present). In order for
> > memcpy() to reason (or really, not reason) about the size of operations
> > against this struct, use of bytes beyond it_present need to be treated
> > as part of the flexible array. Add a union/struct to contain the new
> > "bitmap" member, for use with trailing presence bitmaps and arguments.
> > 
> > Additionally improve readability in the iterator code which walks
> > through the bitmaps and arguments.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > ---
> >  include/net/ieee80211_radiotap.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
> >  net/mac80211/rx.c                |  2 +-
> >  net/wireless/radiotap.c          |  5 ++---
> >  3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/net/ieee80211_radiotap.h b/include/net/ieee80211_radiotap.h
> > index c0854933e24f..101c1e961032 100644
> > --- a/include/net/ieee80211_radiotap.h
> > +++ b/include/net/ieee80211_radiotap.h
> > @@ -39,10 +39,26 @@ struct ieee80211_radiotap_header {
> >  	 */
> >  	__le16 it_len;
> >  
> > -	/**
> > -	 * @it_present: (first) present word
> > -	 */
> > -	__le32 it_present;
> > +	union {
> > +		/**
> > +		 * @it_present: (first) present word
> > +		 */
> > +		__le32 it_present;
> > +
> > +		struct {
> > +			/* The compiler makes it difficult to overlap
> > +			 * a flex-array with an existing singleton,
> > +			 * so we're forced to add an empty named
> > +			 * variable here.
> > +			 */
> > +			struct { } __unused;
> > +
> > +			/**
> > +			 * @bitmap: all presence bitmaps
> > +			 */
> > +			__le32 bitmap[];
> > +		};
> > +	};
> >  } __packed;
> 
> This patch is so confusing...

Right, unfortunately your patch doesn't work under the strict memcpy().
:(

Here are the constraints I navigated to come to the original patch I
sent:

* I need to directly reference a flexible array for the it_present
  pointer because pos is based on it, and the compiler thinks pos
  walks off the end of the struct:

	In function 'fortify_memcpy_chk',
	    inlined from 'ieee80211_add_rx_radiotap_header' at net/mac80211/rx.c:652:3:
	./include/linux/fortify-string.h:285:4: warning: call to '__write_overflow_field' declared with attribute warning: detected write beyond size of field (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()?  [-Wattribute-warning]
	  285 |    __write_overflow_field();
	      |    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

* It's churn/fragile to change the sizeof(), so I can't just do:
	-	__le32 it_present;
	+	__le32 it_bitmap[];

* I want to use a union:
	-	__le32 it_present;
	+	union {
	+		__le32 it_present;
	+		__le32 it_bitmap[];
	+	};
* ... but I can't actually use a union because of compiler constraints
  on flexible array members:
	./include/net/ieee80211_radiotap.h:50:10: error: flexible array member in union
	   50 |   __le32 it_optional[];
	      |          ^~~~~~~~~~~

* So I came to the horrible thing I original sent. :P

If I could escape the __le32 *it_present incrementing, I could use a
simple change:
	 	__le32 it_present;
	+	__le32 it_optional[];


> Btw, after the end of the __le32 data there is a bunch of other le64,
> u8 and le16 data so the struct is not accurate or complete.

Hm, docs seem to indicate that the packet format is multiples of u32?
*shrug*

Hmpf.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook