netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] vsprintf: Warn on integer scanning overflows

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]

Message-ID: <1744246043.3699439.1686240873455.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2023 18:14:33 +0200 (CEST)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-hardening <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, 
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, 
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, 
	senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>, 
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, 
	davem <davem@...emloft.net>, edumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	kuba <kuba@...nel.org>, pabeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, 
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, 
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, 
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] vsprintf: Warn on integer scanning overflows

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
>>  	if (prefix_chars < max_chars) {
>>  		rv = _parse_integer_limit(cp, base, &result, max_chars - prefix_chars);
>> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(rv & KSTRTOX_OVERFLOW);
> 
> This seems incorrect. simple_strto*() are okay to overflow. It's by design.

Is this design decision also known to all users of scanf functions in the kernel?

Thanks,
//richard