Re: [PATCH net-next] net: mdio: Add netlink interface

[Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@seco.com>]

On 3/6/23 17:48, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 03:45:16PM -0500, Sean Anderson wrote:
>> +static int mdio_nl_eval(struct mdio_nl_xfer *xfer)
>> +{
>> +	struct mdio_nl_insn *insn;
>> +	unsigned long timeout;
>> +	u16 regs[8] = { 0 };
>> +	int pc, ret = 0;
> 
> So "pc" is signed.
> 
>> +	int phy_id, reg, prtad, devad, val;
>> +
>> +	timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(xfer->timeout_ms);
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&xfer->mdio->mdio_lock);
>> +
>> +	for (insn = xfer->prog, pc = 0;
>> +	     pc < xfer->prog_len;
> 
> xfer->prog_len is signed, so this is a signed comparison.
> 
>> +		case MDIO_NL_OP_JEQ:
>> +			if (__arg_ri(insn->arg0, regs) ==
>> +			    __arg_ri(insn->arg1, regs))
>> +				pc += (s16)__arg_i(insn->arg2);
> 
> This adds a signed 16-bit integer to pc, which can make pc negative.
> 
> And so the question becomes... what prevents pc becoming negative
> and then trying to use a negative number as an index?

We start executing from somewhere on the heap :)

> I think prog_len and pc should both be unsigned, then the test you
> have will be unsigned, and thus wrapping "pc" around zero makes it
> a very large integer which fails the test - preventing at least
> access outside of the array.

Will fix.

> Better still would be a validator
> that checks that the program is in fact safe to execute.

I think mdio_nl_validate_prog could be extended to check for this.

--Sean