From: Omer Shalev <email@example.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Hans Verkuil <email@example.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Kate Stewart <email@example.com>,
Richard Fontana <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Allison Randal <email@example.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media:usb:cpia2: Properly check framebuffer mmap offsets
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 18:53:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191111185323.GA22070@arch-vook> (raw)
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 05:29:07PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 06:24:42PM +0000, Omer Shalev wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 12:46:15PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 12:39:43PM +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> > > > Hi Greg,
> > > >
> > > > On 11/8/19 9:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 09:50:36PM +0000, Omer Shalev wrote:
> > > > >> The cpai2 driver's mmap implementation wasn't properly check for all
> > > > >> possible offset values. Given a huge offset value , the calculation
> > > > >> start_offset + size can wrap around to a low value and pass the check
> > > > >
> > > > > I thought we checked that in the core of the kernel now, to keep all
> > > > > drivers from not having to do this type of thing (as they obviously all
> > > > > forgot to.) Why is this still needed here as well?
> > > >
> > > > Where is that checked in the core? I couldn't find anything, but I might
> > > > have been looking in the wrong place.
> > >
> > > Sorry, took me a while to find it. Look at be83bbf80682 ("mmap:
> > > introduce sane default mmap limits") as I think this should handle the
> > > problem already.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> > Thanks Greg. But All other drivers I've seen implement it like that: if(size > total_size || offset >
> > total_size - size). Which I think, is a better way to write this code, and generally more
> > secure. Plus, no extra code is needed (just changing this line).
> The point of the above commit that is in the tree is that no driver has
> to do this check at all, it's already been done before the driver ever
> gets called, right?
> So yes, there's lots of history of drivers doing the check themselves
> (and getting it wrong as you point out), but that should not matter
> Can you verify that your change isn't even needed due to the above
> mentioned core check for valid values?
> greg k-h
Yes I got it , and thanks again. I think that programmatically , its
better to write that this way, And therefore I suggested this patch.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-11 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-08 21:50 [PATCH] media:usb:cpia2: Properly check framebuffer mmap offsets Omer Shalev
2019-11-08 20:49 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-11-09 11:39 ` Hans Verkuil
2019-11-11 11:46 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-11-11 18:24 ` Omer Shalev
2019-11-11 16:29 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-11-11 18:53 ` Omer Shalev [this message]
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).