From: Bryam Vargas <hexlabsecurity@proton.me>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: "Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
"David Lechner" <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: accel: bmc150: clamp the device-reported FIFO frame count
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2026 07:35:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260613073504.168858-1-hexlabsecurity@proton.me> (raw)
A couple of things that belong with the patch I just sent: the reproducer
I used, and a heads-up about an in-flight series on this file.
Reproducer
==========
I reproduced the out-of-bounds write with an in-kernel test that drives the
__bmc150_accel_fifo_flush() buffer geometry verbatim under KASAN
(CONFIG_KASAN_STACK=y), with the device-supplied frame count:
count=127, samples=0 (flush-all), no clamp:
BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in ...fifo_flush
Write of size 762 ... 'buffer' (the 192-byte buffer)
with the patch (clamp to BMC150_ACCEL_FIFO_LENGTH): the transfer is
bounded to 32 samples, no KASAN report.
a well-formed (<= 32 sample) flush is unaffected, no KASAN report.
The full 762-byte write -- a 570-byte overflow past buffer[] that smashes the
stack canary and the return address -- reproduces the same way under userspace
AddressSanitizer on -m32 and -m64. The FIFO frame count is read over I2C/SPI
from the accelerometer, so triggering this requires a malicious or defective
device, or tampering on the bus. No CVE has been assigned.
In-flight series on this file
=============================
There is an in-flight cleanup from Gabriel Rondon converting this driver's
locking to guard(mutex):
[PATCH v3] iio: accel: bmc150: use guard(mutex) for mutex handling
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260525110130.61284-1-grondon@gmail.com/
That series only rewrites the mutex_lock()/mutex_unlock() pairs -- including
the bmc150_accel_fifo_flush() wrapper -- and does not touch the count handling
in __bmc150_accel_fifo_flush(), so this fix is independent of it and the two
apply cleanly together. This patch is against mainline; if the guard(mutex)
series lands first it needs only a context-line refresh.
Thanks,
Bryam
next reply other threads:[~2026-06-13 7:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-13 7:35 Bryam Vargas [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-06-13 7:18 Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay
2026-06-14 13:11 ` Jonathan Cameron
Reply instructions:
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260613073504.168858-1-hexlabsecurity@proton.me \
--to=hexlabsecurity@proton.me \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®