Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220120130605.55741-1-dzm91@hust.edu.cn> <b5cb1132-2f6b-e2da-78c7-1828b3617bc3@gmail.com>
 <CAD-N9QWvfoo_HtQ+KT-7JNFumQMaq8YqMkHGR2t7pDKsDW0hkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD-N9QUfiTNqs7uOH3C99oMNdqFXh+MKLQ94BkQou_T7-yU_mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD-N9QUZ95zqboe=58gybue6ssSO-M-raijd3XnGXkXnp3wiqQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8d4b0822-4e94-d124-e191-bec3effaf97c@gmail.com> <CAD-N9QUATFcaOO2reg=Y0jum83UJGOzMhcX3ukCY+cY-XCJaPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <192d9115-864f-d2c1-d11b-d75c23c26102@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <192d9115-864f-d2c1-d11b-d75c23c26102@gmail.com>
From:   Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:04:38 +0800
Message-ID: <CAD-N9QVwhfcswwSmFW0TUevqH7ehE_r6CWG3Uw9j5T37wPiPZw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: net: remove a dangling pointer in peak_usb_create_dev
To:     Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
Cc:     Dongliang Mu <dzm91@hust.edu.cn>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Stefan_M=C3=A4tje?= <stefan.maetje@esd.eu>,
        Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>,
        linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 9:48 PM Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Dongliang,
>
> On 1/22/22 09:45, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> [...]
>
> >> Yeah, it seems like (at least based on code), that this dangling pointer
> >> is not dangerous, since nothing accesses it. And next_siblings
> >> _guaranteed_ to be NULL, since dev->next_siblings is set NULL in
> >> disconnect()
> >
> > Yes, you're right. As a security researcher, I am sensitive to such
> > dangling pointers.
> >
> > As its nullifying site is across functions, I suggest developers
> > remove this dangling pointer in case that any newly added code in this
> > function or before the nullifying location would touch next_siblings.
> >
>
> Based on git blame this driver is very old (was added in 2012), so, I
> guess, nothing really new will come up.
>
> Anyway, I am absolutely not a security person and if you think, that
> this dangling pointer can be somehow used in exploitation you should
> state it in commit message.
>
>
> > If Pavel and others think it's fine, then it's time to close this patch.
> >
>
> I don't have any big objections on the code itself. Maybe only 'if' can
> be removed to just speed up the code, but I don't see why this change is
> needed :)

OK, let's move on. Leave alone this patch.

>
>
>
>
> With regards,
> Pavel Skripkin