Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751896AbaKKQbD (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:31:03 -0500 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:57150 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751440AbaKKQbB (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:31:01 -0500 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:13:56 +0100 From: Stefan Richter To: linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: David Ramos , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/firewire: fix use/leak of uninitialized stack memory in dispatch_ioctl() Message-ID: <20141111171356.2fc62440@kant> In-Reply-To: <20141111130143.2ff3d42e@kant> References: <55D28623-C1C7-47D2-9638-0B8FD0733C48@stanford.edu> <20141111010340.3329bbd7@kant> <20141111130143.2ff3d42e@kant> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.24; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Adding Cc: linux-api and lkml, quoting parent message in full On Nov 11 Stefan Richter wrote: > On Nov 11 Stefan Richter wrote: > > On Nov 10 David Ramos wrote: > > > This patch fixes an uninitialized memory use/leak bug discovered > > > by our UC-KLEE tool in the 3.16.3 kernel. > > > > There is uninitialized memory use, but no leak. > > Actually there could be leaks too. If later fw_cdev_event_ are > generated, they will contain the __u64 closure field that many of the > ioctl argument structures contain. > > > [...] > > > If a user carefully crafts an ioctl command such that _IOC_DIR(cmd) > > > == 0, 'buffer' is left uninitialized. Each of the ioctl_handlers then > > > accesses the pre-existing stack values, which will cause unpredictable > > > behavior. > > > > Not all (but indeed almost all) ioctl handlers will use uninitialized > > memory in that case. The damage should be marginal though, because all of > > these handlers must implement sufficient arguments checking anyway. > > > > > This patch checks for an invalid cmd and rejects it with -ENOTTY. > > > > This is not exactly what your patch does. Rather... > > > > > --- a/drivers/firewire/core-cdev.c > > > +++ b/drivers/firewire/core-cdev.c > > > @@ -1632,7 +1632,8 @@ static int dispatch_ioctl(struct client *client, > > > if (fw_device_is_shutdown(client->device)) > > > return -ENODEV; > > > > > > - if (_IOC_TYPE(cmd) != '#' || > > > + if (_IOC_DIR(cmd) == _IOC_NONE || > > > + _IOC_TYPE(cmd) != '#' || > > > _IOC_NR(cmd) >= ARRAY_SIZE(ioctl_handlers) || > > > _IOC_SIZE(cmd) > sizeof(buffer)) > > > return -ENOTTY; > > > > ...it quits *all* _IOC_NONE ioctls with -ENOTTY, not just invalid ones. > > If you have a look at the ABI definition in > > include/uapi/linux/firewire-cdev.h, you will notice that this approach is > > insufficient. > > I suppose we should add checks > 1. for _IOC_DIR matching the expected direction depending on _IOC_NR > (or at least for presence of _IOC_WRITE when expected), and > 2. for _IOC_SIZE being at least as big as the minimum unaligned argument > size depending on _IOC_NR (at least in case of > _IOC_DIR(cmd) & _IOC_WRITE). > > BTW, I don't think it is worthwhile to check for upper bounds of _IOC_SIZE > besides the present check against sizeof(buffer), since the precise size of > arguments depends on structure alignment of the user code and on ABI > version. I will follow up with two alternative patches for discussion; either one should fix the issue but they differ in complexity and runtime cost: [PATCH RFC v1a] firewire: cdev: prevent kernel stack leaking into ioctl arguments [PATCH RFC v1b] firewire: cdev: prevent kernel stack leaking into ioctl arguments If I receive no feedback to the contrary, I will probably submit patch v1b to upstream, which is the simpler one of the two. -- Stefan Richter -=====-====- =-== -=-== http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/