| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Syzbot reported that ethnl_compact_sanity_checks() can be tricked into
reading past the end of ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_VALUE and ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_MASK
attributes and even the message by passing a value between (u32)(-31)
and (u32)(-1) as ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_SIZE.
The problem is that DIV_ROUND_UP(attr_nbits, 32) is 0 for such values so
that zero length ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_VALUE will pass the length check but
ethnl_bitmap32_not_zero() check would try to access up to 512 MB of
attribute "payload".
Prevent this overflow byt limiting the bitset size. Technically, compact
bitset format would allow bitset sizes up to almost 2^18 (so that the
nest size does not exceed U16_MAX) but bitsets used by ethtool are much
shorter. S16_MAX, the largest value which can be directly used as an
upper limit in policy, should be a reasonable compromise.
Fixes: 10b518d4e6dd ("ethtool: netlink bitset handling")
Reported-by: syzbot+7fd4ed5b4234ab1fdccd@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: syzbot+709b7a64d57978247e44@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: syzbot+983cb8fb2d17a7af549d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
A bitset without mask in a _SET request means we want exactly the bits in
the bitset to be set. This works correctly for compact format but when
verbose format is parsed, ethnl_update_bitset32_verbose() only sets the
bits present in the request bitset but does not clear the rest. This can
cause incorrect results like
lion:~ # ethtool eth0 | grep Wake
Supports Wake-on: pumbg
Wake-on: g
lion:~ # ethtool -s eth0 wol u
lion:~ # ethtool eth0 | grep Wake
Supports Wake-on: pumbg
Wake-on: ug
when the second ethtool command issues request
ETHTOOL_MSG_WOL_SET
ETHTOOL_A_WOL_HEADER
ETHTOOL_A_HEADER_DEV_NAME = "eth0"
ETHTOOL_A_WOL_MODES
ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_NOMASK
ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_BITS
ETHTOOL_A_BITSET_BITS_BIT
ETHTOOL_BITSET_BIT_INDEX = 1
Fix the logic by clearing the whole target bitmap before we start iterating
through the request bits.
Fixes: 10b518d4e6dd ("ethtool: netlink bitset handling")
Signed-off-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The ethtool netlink code uses common framework for passing arbitrary
length bit sets to allow future extensions. A bitset can be a list (only
one bitmap) or can consist of value and mask pair (used e.g. when client
want to modify only some bits). A bitset can use one of two formats:
verbose (bit by bit) or compact.
Verbose format consists of bitset size (number of bits), list flag and
an array of bit nests, telling which bits are part of the list or which
bits are in the mask and which of them are to be set. In requests, bits
can be identified by index (position) or by name. In replies, kernel
provides both index and name. Verbose format is suitable for "one shot"
applications like standard ethtool command as it avoids the need to
either keep bit names (e.g. link modes) in sync with kernel or having to
add an extra roundtrip for string set request (e.g. for private flags).
Compact format uses one (list) or two (value/mask) arrays of 32-bit
words to store the bitmap(s). It is more suitable for long running
applications (ethtool in monitor mode or network management daemons)
which can retrieve the names once and then pass only compact bitmaps to
save space.
Userspace requests can use either format; ETHTOOL_FLAG_COMPACT_BITSETS
flag in request header tells kernel which format to use in reply.
Notifications always use compact format.
As some code uses arrays of unsigned long for internal representation and
some arrays of u32 (or even a single u32), two sets of parse/compose
helpers are introduced. To avoid code duplication, helpers for unsigned
long arrays are implemented as wrappers around helpers for u32 arrays.
There are two reasons for this choice: (1) u32 arrays are more frequent in
ethtool code and (2) unsigned long array can be always interpreted as an
u32 array on little endian 64-bit and all 32-bit architectures while we
would need special handling for odd number of u32 words in the opposite
direction.
Signed-off-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
