netdev - RE: [RFC PATCH 1/6] hv_sock: Check hv_pkt_iter_first

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:   Fri, 15 Apr 2022 14:27:37 +0000
From:   "Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>
To:     Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
CC:     KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>, Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
        Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
        "virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 1/6] hv_sock: Check hv_pkt_iter_first_raw()'s return
 value

From: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 11:42 PM
> 
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 03:33:23AM +0000, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
> > From: Andrea Parri (Microsoft) <parri.andrea@...il.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 13,
> 2022 1:48 PM
> > >
> > > The function returns NULL if the ring buffer has no enough space
> > > available for a packet descriptor.  The ring buffer's write_index
> >
> > The first sentence wording is a bit scrambled.  I think you mean the
> > ring buffer doesn't contain enough readable bytes to constitute a
> > packet descriptor.
> 
> Indeed, replaced with your working.
> 
> 
> > > is in memory which is shared with the Hyper-V host, its value is
> > > thus subject to being changed at any time.
> >
> > This second sentence is true, but I'm not making the connection
> > with the code change below.   Evidently, there is some previous
> > check made to ensure that enough bytes are available to be
> > received when hvs_stream_dequeue() is called, so we assumed that
> > NULL could never be returned?  I looked but didn't find such a check,
> > so maybe I didn't look carefully enough.  But now we are assuming
> > that Hyper-V might have invalidated that previous check by
> > subsequently changing the write_index in a bogus way?  So now, NULL
> > could be returned when previously we assumed it couldn't.
> 
> I think you're looking for hvs_stream_has_data().  (Previous checks
> apart, hvs_stream_dequeue() will "dereference" the pointer so...)

Agreed.  I didn't say this explicitly, but I was wondering about the risk
in the current code (without these hardening patches) of getting a
NULL pointer from hv_pkt_iter_first_raw(), and then dereferencing it.

Michael