On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 07:27:19PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> We've seen cases where people passed negative numbers to
> posix_acl_alloc() and we fixed the caller. For example 093019cf1b "xfs:
> fix acl count validation in xfs_acl_from_disk()". But there are other
> places which might be affected like ext4_acl_from_disk() which checks
> for negative but doesn't check an upper limit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/fs/posix_acl.c b/fs/posix_acl.c
> index cea4623..cd7fd2f 100644
> --- a/fs/posix_acl.c
> +++ b/fs/posix_acl.c
> @@ -46,7 +46,12 @@ posix_acl_alloc(int count, gfp_t flags)
> {
> const size_t size = sizeof(struct posix_acl) +
> count * sizeof(struct posix_acl_entry);
> - struct posix_acl *acl = kmalloc(size, flags);
> + struct posix_acl *acl;
> +
> + if (count < 0 || count > (SIZE_MAX - sizeof(struct posix_acl) /
> + sizeof(struct posix_acl_entry)))
Gar. I completely screwed that up. Please ignore this. I will
send a better patch in a couple days. I am sorry.
regards,
dan carpenter
> + return NULL;
> + acl = kmalloc(size, flags);
> if (acl)
> posix_acl_init(acl, count);
> return acl;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
