Re: [PATCH] platform/chrome: cros_ec_dev - Fix security issue

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

 



On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:20 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 07:54:43AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, 17 Mar 2021, Gwendal Grignou wrote:
> > >
> > > > commit 5d749d0bbe811c10d9048cde6dfebc761713abfd upstream.
> > > >
> > > > Prevent memory scribble by checking that ioctl buffer size parameters
> > > > are sane.
> > > > Without this check, on 32 bits system, if .insize = 0xffffffff - 20 and
> > > > .outsize the amount to scribble, we would overflow, allocate a small
> > > > amounts and be able to write outside of the malloc'ed area.
> > > > Adding a hard limit allows argument checking of the ioctl. With the
> > > > current EC, it is expected .insize and .outsize to be at around 512 bytes
> > > > or less.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_dev.c   | 4 ++++
> > > >  drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c | 4 ++--
> > > >  include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h             | 6 ++++--
> > > >  3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_dev.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_dev.c
> > > > index 2b331d5b9e799..e16d82bb36a9d 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_dev.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_dev.c
> > > > @@ -137,6 +137,10 @@ static long ec_device_ioctl_xcmd(struct cros_ec_dev *ec, void __user *arg)
> > > >   if (copy_from_user(&u_cmd, arg, sizeof(u_cmd)))
> > > >           return -EFAULT;
> > > >
> > > > + if ((u_cmd.outsize > EC_MAX_MSG_BYTES) ||
> > > > +     (u_cmd.insize > EC_MAX_MSG_BYTES))
> > > > +         return -EINVAL;
> > > > +
> > > >   s_cmd = kmalloc(sizeof(*s_cmd) + max(u_cmd.outsize, u_cmd.insize),
> > > >                   GFP_KERNEL);
> > > >   if (!s_cmd)
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> > > > index 5c285f2b3a650..d20190c8f0c06 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> > > > @@ -311,8 +311,8 @@ int cros_ec_query_all(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev)
> > > >                   ec_dev->max_response = EC_PROTO2_MAX_PARAM_SIZE;
> > > >                   ec_dev->max_passthru = 0;
> > > >                   ec_dev->pkt_xfer = NULL;
> > > > -                 ec_dev->din_size = EC_MSG_BYTES;
> > > > -                 ec_dev->dout_size = EC_MSG_BYTES;
> > > > +                 ec_dev->din_size = EC_PROTO2_MSG_BYTES;
> > > > +                 ec_dev->dout_size = EC_PROTO2_MSG_BYTES;
> > > >           } else {
> > > >                   /*
> > > >                    * It's possible for a test to occur too early when
> > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h
> > > > index 3ab3cede28eac..93c14e9df6309 100644
> > > > --- a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h
> > > > @@ -50,9 +50,11 @@ enum {
> > > >                                   EC_MSG_TX_TRAILER_BYTES,
> > > >   EC_MSG_RX_PROTO_BYTES   = 3,
> > > >
> > > > - /* Max length of messages */
> > > > - EC_MSG_BYTES            = EC_PROTO2_MAX_PARAM_SIZE +
> > > > + /* Max length of messages for proto 2*/
> > > > + EC_PROTO2_MSG_BYTES             = EC_PROTO2_MAX_PARAM_SIZE +
> > > >                                   EC_MSG_TX_PROTO_BYTES,
> > >
> > > Nit: Better to not tab the '=' so far and place it all on one line.
> > >
> > > Checkpatch now only complains about lines exceeding 100 chars.
> > >
> > > Once fixed, feel free to apply my:
> > >
> > >   Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This commit is already in 4.7, and is from 2016, so I don't know why you
> > are reviewing it :)
My mistake, I overlooked the branch information is removed when
formatting a patch: it is for branch linux-4.4.y in linux stable git
tree.

>
> Heh!  It looked like a standard patch at first glance.
>
> Must have skipped over the "commit" line in the commit log.
>
> I wonder why it doesn't have my Ack on it already then?
You were not in the loop on the original thread:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/3/8/628
Sorry about that,

Gwendal.


>
> --
> Lee Jones [李琼斯]
> Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
> Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
> Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux