|
Message-ID: <20180615171033.GG30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 18:10:33 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, dgilbert@...erlog.com, jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, security@...nel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sg, bsg: mitigate read/write abuse, block uaccess in release On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 05:53:10PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 06:44:51PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:40 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 05:23:35PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > > > > > I've mostly copypasted ib_safe_file_access() over as > > > > scsi_safe_file_access() because I couldn't find a good common header - > > > > please tell me if you know a better way. > > > > The duplicate pr_err_once() calls are so that each of them fires once; > > > > otherwise, this would probably have to be a macro. > > > > > > > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> > > > > --- > > > > > > WTF do you mean, in ->release()? That makes no sense whatsoever - > > > what kind of copy_{to,from}_user() would be possible in there? > > > > bsg_release -> bsg_put_device -> bsg_complete_all_commands -> > > blk_complete_sgv4_hdr_rq -> bsg_scsi_complete_rq -> copy_to_user. > > I don't think that was intentional. > > > > Basically, the sense buffer is copied to a userspace address supplied > > in the previous ->write() when you ->read() the reply. But when you > > ->release() the file without reading the reply, they have to clean it > > up, and for that, they reuse the same code they use for ->read() - so > > the sense buffer is written to userspace on ->release(). > > Pardon me, that has only one fix - git rm. This is too broken for words - > if your reading is correct, the interface is unsalvagable. I hope you > *are* misreading it, but if not... how did that insanity get through > review at merge time? AFAICS, it went in as part of commit 3d6392cfbd7d "bsg: support for full generic block layer SG v3", so your 2.6.12-rc2 is too old...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.