RE: [PATCH] rtw88: Fix out-of-bounds write

[Pkshih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Len Baker [mailto:len.baker@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2021 10:17 PM
> To: Yan-Hsuan Chuang; Kalle Valo; David S. Miller; Jakub Kicinski
> Cc: Len Baker; Stanislaw Gruszka; Brian Norris; linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [PATCH] rtw88: Fix out-of-bounds write
> 
> In the rtw_pci_init_rx_ring function the "if (len > TRX_BD_IDX_MASK)"
> statement guarantees that len is less than or equal to GENMASK(11, 0) or
> in other words that len is less than or equal to 4095. However the
> rx_ring->buf has a size of RTK_MAX_RX_DESC_NUM (defined as 512). This
> way it is possible an out-of-bounds write in the for statement due to
> the i variable can exceed the rx_ring->buff size.
> 
> Fix it using the ARRAY_SIZE macro.
> 
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1461515 ("Out-of-bounds write")
> Fixes: e3037485c68ec ("rtw88: new Realtek 802.11ac driver")
> Signed-off-by: Len Baker <len.baker@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> index e7d17ab8f113..b9d8c049e776 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static int rtw_pci_init_rx_ring(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,

I think "if (len > TRX_BD_IDX_MASK)" you mentioned is

	if (len > TRX_BD_IDX_MASK) {
		rtw_err(rtwdev, "len %d exceeds maximum RX entries\n", len);
		return -EINVAL;
	}

This statement is used to ensure the length doesn't exceed hardware capability.

To prevent the 'len' argument from exceeding the array size of rx_ring->buff, I
suggest to add another checking statement, like

	if (len > ARRAY_SIZE(rx_ring->buf)) {
		rtw_err(rtwdev, "len %d exceeds maximum RX ring buffer\n", len);
		return -EINVAL;
	}

But, I wonder if this a false alarm because 'len' is equal to ARRAY_SIZE(rx_ring->buf)
for now.


>  	}
>  	rx_ring->r.head = head;
> 
> -	for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
> +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(rx_ring->buf); i++) {
>  		skb = dev_alloc_skb(buf_sz);
>  		if (!skb) {
>  			allocated = i;
> --
> 2.25.1

--
Ping-Ke