Re: [PATCH] evm: fix writing <securityfs>/evm overflow

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 4/29/21 3:53 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
EVM_SETUP_COMPLETE is defined as 0x80000000, which is larger than INT_MAX.
The "-fno-strict-overflow" compiler option properly prevents signaling
EVM that the EVM policy setup is complete.  Define and read an unsigned
int.

Fixes: f00d79750712 ("EVM: Allow userspace to signal an RSA key has been
loaded")
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Tested-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

---
  security/integrity/evm/evm_secfs.c | 5 +++--
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/integrity/evm/evm_secfs.c b/security/integrity/evm/evm_secfs.c
index bbc85637e18b..0007d3362754 100644
--- a/security/integrity/evm/evm_secfs.c
+++ b/security/integrity/evm/evm_secfs.c
@@ -66,12 +66,13 @@ static ssize_t evm_read_key(struct file *filp, char __user *buf,
  static ssize_t evm_write_key(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
  			     size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
  {
-	int i, ret;
+	unsigned int i;
+	int ret;
if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) || (evm_initialized & EVM_SETUP_COMPLETE))
  		return -EPERM;
- ret = kstrtoint_from_user(buf, count, 0, &i);
+	ret = kstrtouint_from_user(buf, count, 0, &i);
if (ret)
  		return ret;



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Kernel Hardening]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux