Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/7] tpm: ensure that the output of PCR read contains
 the correct digest size
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
CC:     <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, <david.safford@ge.com>,
        <monty.wiseman@ge.com>, <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <silviu.vlasceanu@huawei.com>
References: <20181204082138.24600-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
 <20181204082138.24600-7-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
 <20181205000910.GE1233@linux.intel.com>
 <20181205004643.GA26578@linux.intel.com>
From:   Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <af5a430f-c6ef-3989-0d93-7f972c26737d@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Dec 2018 19:07:34 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181205004643.GA26578@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 12/5/2018 1:46 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 04:09:10PM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 09:21:37AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
>>>   	out = (struct tpm2_pcr_read_out *)&buf.data[TPM_HEADER_SIZE];
>>>   	digest_size = be16_to_cpu(out->digest_size);
>>> -	if (digest_size > sizeof(digest->digest)) {
>>> +	if (digest_size > sizeof(digest->digest) ||
>>> +	    (!digest_size_ptr && digest_size != expected_digest_size)) {
>>>   		rc = -EINVAL;
>>>   		goto out;
>>>   	}
>>
>> Just noticed this but you must squash 4-6 because applying only
>> previous commits will result a broken tree. It will be much bigger
>> commit but won't be broken.
>>
>> I think you should also feed min_rsp_body_length as you should be
>> able to precalculate.
>>
>> Last time I was asking why this isn't a bug fix. It is even for
>> the existing code. The existing code should have a bug fix that
>> checks that the received digest size so that it is the expected
>> SHA1 size before we can apply this commit.
> 
> My bad. This is not the same deal as the code because in the old code we
> always copy a constant block. Here we use the variable as parameter for
> memcpy() so it is better to check the size. You can ignore the last
> paragraph completely. Sorry, had to double check this one.
> 
> There is no need to do any type of bug fix for the current tree.
> 
> Still 4-6 need to be squashed in order to not put purposely the tree
> into broken state.

Ok. I keep the description of 5, and add few details from 4 and 6.

Roberto


> /Jarko
> 

-- 
HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063
Managing Director: Bo PENG, Jian LI, Yanli SHI