From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hridya@google.com (Hridya Valsaraju) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 11:41:12 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] binder: Validate the default binderfs device names. In-Reply-To: <20190809181439.qrs2k7l23ot4am4s@wittgenstein> References: <20190808222727.132744-1-hridya@google.com> <20190808222727.132744-3-hridya@google.com> <20190809145508.GD16262@kroah.com> <20190809181439.qrs2k7l23ot4am4s@wittgenstein> Message-ID: List-Id: Linux Driver Project Developer List On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 11:14 AM Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 09, 2019@04:55:08PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019@03:27:26PM -0700, Hridya Valsaraju wrote: > > > Length of a binderfs device name cannot exceed BINDERFS_MAX_NAME. > > > This patch adds a check in binderfs_init() to ensure the same > > > for the default binder devices that will be created in every > > > binderfs instance. > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Christian Brauner > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner > > > Signed-off-by: Hridya Valsaraju > > > --- > > > drivers/android/binderfs.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/android/binderfs.c b/drivers/android/binderfs.c > > > index aee46dd1be91..55c5adb87585 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/android/binderfs.c > > > +++ b/drivers/android/binderfs.c > > > @@ -570,6 +570,18 @@ static struct file_system_type binder_fs_type = { > > > int __init init_binderfs(void) > > > { > > > int ret; > > > + const char *name; > > > + size_t len; > > > + > > > + /* Verify that the default binderfs device names are valid. */ > > > > And by "valid" you only mean "not bigger than BINDERFS_MAX_NAME, right? > > > > > + name = binder_devices_param; > > > + for (len = strcspn(name, ","); len > 0; len = strcspn(name, ",")) { > > > + if (len > BINDERFS_MAX_NAME) > > > + return -E2BIG; > > > + name += len; > > > + if (*name == ',') > > > + name++; > > > + } > > > > We already tokenize the binderfs device names in binder_init(), why not > > check this there instead? Parsing the same string over and over isn't > > the nicest. > > non-binderfs binder devices do not have their limit set to > BINDERFS_NAME_MAX. That's why the check has likely been made specific to > binderfs binder devices which do have that limit. Thank you Greg and Christian, for taking another look. Yes, non-binderfs binder devices not having this limitation is the reason why the check was made specific to binderfs devices. Also, when CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDERFS is set, patch 1/2 disabled the same string being parsed in binder_init(). > > But, in practice, 255 is the standard path-part limit that no-one really > exceeds especially not for stuff such as device nodes which usually have > rather standard naming schemes (e.g. binder, vndbinder, hwbinder, etc.). > So yes, we can move that check before both the binderfs binder device > and non-binderfs binder device parsing code and treat it as a generic > check. > Then we can also backport that check as you requested in the other mail. > Unless Hridya or Todd have objections, of course. I do not have any objections to adding a generic check in binder_init() instead. > > Christian