drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c | 11 +++-------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Switch to memdup_user() to overwrite the allocated memory only once
instead of initializing the allocated memory to zero with kzalloc() and
then immediately overwriting it with copy_from_user().
Fix the following Coccinelle/coccicheck warning reported by
memdup_user.cocci:
WARNING opportunity for memdup_user
Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@toblux.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Update patch description after feedback from Markus Elfring
---
drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c | 11 +++--------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c
index b438de4d6bfc..1b53cabc9aa2 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c
@@ -301,14 +301,9 @@ static ssize_t amd_pmf_get_pb_data(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf,
return -EINVAL;
/* re-alloc to the new buffer length of the policy binary */
- new_policy_buf = kzalloc(length, GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!new_policy_buf)
- return -ENOMEM;
-
- if (copy_from_user(new_policy_buf, buf, length)) {
- kfree(new_policy_buf);
- return -EFAULT;
- }
+ new_policy_buf = memdup_user(buf, length);
+ if (IS_ERR(new_policy_buf))
+ return PTR_ERR(new_policy_buf);
kfree(dev->policy_buf);
dev->policy_buf = new_policy_buf;
--
2.45.1
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:36:29AM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote: > Switch to memdup_user() to overwrite the allocated memory only once > instead of initializing the allocated memory to zero with kzalloc() and > then immediately overwriting it with copy_from_user(). > > Fix the following Coccinelle/coccicheck warning reported by > memdup_user.cocci: > > WARNING opportunity for memdup_user > > Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@toblux.com> > --- > Changes in v2: > - Update patch description after feedback from Markus Elfring Markus always CC's kernel-janitors even though I have asked him not to. :( > --- > drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c | 11 +++-------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c > index b438de4d6bfc..1b53cabc9aa2 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c > @@ -301,14 +301,9 @@ static ssize_t amd_pmf_get_pb_data(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, > return -EINVAL; This -EINVAL check could be made stricter. Instead of checking for zero it could check for the limit from amd_pmf_start_policy_engine(): if (dev->policy_sz < POLICY_COOKIE_OFFSET + sizeof(*header)) return -EINVAL; Also this check isn't great: if (dev->policy_sz < header->length + 512) header->length is a u32 that comes from the user, so the addition can overflow. I can't immediately see how to exploit this though since we don't seem to use header->length after this (by itself). regards, dan carpenter
Hi Dan, On 27. May 2024, at 12:38, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> wrote: > Also this check isn't great: > > if (dev->policy_sz < header->length + 512) > > header->length is a u32 that comes from the user, so the addition can > overflow. I can't immediately see how to exploit this though since we > don't seem to use header->length after this (by itself). How about if (header->length > U32_MAX - 512 || dev->policy_sz < header->length + 512) return -EINVAL; to prevent a possible overflow? header->length is used in the next line dev->policy_sz = header->length + 512; and if the addition overflows, we end up setting dev->policy_sz to an invalid value. Thanks, Thorsten
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 04:15:51PM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On 27. May 2024, at 12:38, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> wrote:
> > Also this check isn't great:
> >
> > if (dev->policy_sz < header->length + 512)
> >
> > header->length is a u32 that comes from the user, so the addition can
> > overflow. I can't immediately see how to exploit this though since we
> > don't seem to use header->length after this (by itself).
>
> How about
>
> if (header->length > U32_MAX - 512 || dev->policy_sz < header->length + 512)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> to prevent a possible overflow?
I've been thinking about this and actually we could do something simpler:
if (dev->policy_sz < size_add(header->length, 512)) {
>
> header->length is used in the next line
>
> dev->policy_sz = header->length + 512;
Yeah, but it's not used by itself. The "header->length + 512" has been
verified as a valid value whether it overflows or not. Only
"header->length" is wrong.
>
> and if the addition overflows, we end up setting dev->policy_sz to an
> invalid value.
regards,
dan carpenter
On Mon, 27 May 2024 10:36:29 +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> Switch to memdup_user() to overwrite the allocated memory only once
> instead of initializing the allocated memory to zero with kzalloc() and
> then immediately overwriting it with copy_from_user().
>
> Fix the following Coccinelle/coccicheck warning reported by
> memdup_user.cocci:
>
> [...]
Thank you for your contribution, it has been applied to my local
review-ilpo branch. Note it will show up in the public
platform-drivers-x86/review-ilpo branch only once I've pushed my
local branch there, which might take a while.
The list of commits applied:
[1/1] platform/x86/amd/pmf: Use memdup_user()
commit: 46de513068f956b76d68d241a7ad6bc5576d2948
--
i.
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.