Re: [PATCH] v4l2: handle multiplication overflow
Em 22-12-2011 07:42, Németh Márton escreveu:
From: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
When a V4L2 ioctl is executed the memory provided by the caller in user space
is copied to the kernel space in video_usercopy() function. To find out
how many bytes has to be copied the check_array_args() helper function is
used.
This patch adds a check for multiplication overflow. Without this check the
multiplication may overflow resulting array_size to be zero. This means that
later on uninitialized value can trigger NULL pointer exception.
The overflow happens because ctrls-count is an __u32 multiplied by a constant
coming from sizeof() operator. Multiplication result of two 32bit value may
be a 64bit value, thus overflow can happen. Similarly buf-length is an __u32
multiplied by a constant coming from sizeof() operator.
The chosen error value is -ENOMEM because we are just about to allocate
kernel memory to copy data from userspace. We cannot even store the required
number of bytes in the variable of size_t type.
To trigger the error from user space use the v4l-test 0.19 [1] or essentially
the following code fragment:
struct v4l2_ext_controls controls;
memset(controls, 0, sizeof(controls));
controls.ctrl_class = V4L2_CTRL_CLASS_USER;
controls.count = 0x4000;
controls.controls = NULL;
ret = ioctl(f, VIDIOC_G_EXT_CTRLS, controls);
References:
[1] v4l-test: Test environment for Video For Linux Two (V4L2) API
http://v4l-test.sourceforge.net/
Signed-off-by: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
---
I'm a little bit in doubt whether this is the correct way to check for the
multiplication overflow. In case of x86 architecture the MUL insruction [2]
can be used to multiply EAX with an other 32bit register, and the 64bit result
is placed to EDX:EAX. In case of EDX != 0 the carry and overflow flags are
set.
This means that executing the MUL instruction on x86 already provides
information
whether the result fits to 32bit or not. I might use __u64 as a result of the
multiplication and check whether the upper 32bit is still zero but the optimal
would be to check for the carry or the overflow flag.
Still, there could be a special case when the constant from sizeof() operator
is
a power of 2, in this case the compiler might optimize the multiplication
using
a shift left. In this case something else is needed.
I couldn't really find information about the number of bits for size_t on
different architectures. If size_t happens to be at least 64bit on some
architecture
then this overflow will not happen at all and the array_size will contain the
correct value.
What do you think?
Hi Németh,
IMO, the check should, instead, use a max hard limit for the array size.
There's no sense on allowing very large arrays there.
I think that this patch become obsoleted by this one, already merged:
commit 6c06108be53ca5e94d8b0e93883d534dd9079646
Author: Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com
Date: Thu Jan 5 02:27:57 2012 -0300
[media] V4L/DVB: v4l2-ioctl: integer overflow in video_usercopy()
If ctrls-count is too high the multiplication could overflow and
array_size would be lower than expected. Mauro and Hans Verkuil
suggested that we cap it at 1024. That comes from the maximum
number of controls with lots of room for expantion.
$ grep V4L2_CID include/linux/videodev2.h | wc -l
211
Cc: stable sta...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab mche...@redhat.com
diff --git a/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c b/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
index e1da8fc..639abee 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
@@ -2226,6 +2226,10 @@ static int check_array_args(unsigned int cmd, void
*parg, size_t *array_size,
struct v4l2_ext_controls *ctrls = parg;
if (ctrls-count != 0) {
+ if (ctrls-count V4L2_CID_MAX_CTRLS) {
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ break;
+ }
*user_ptr = (void __user *)ctrls-controls;
*kernel_ptr = (void *)ctrls-controls;
*array_size = sizeof(struct v4l2_ext_control)
diff --git a/include/linux/videodev2.h b/include/linux/videodev2.h
index 6bfaa76..b2e1331 100644
--- a/include/linux/videodev2.h
+++ b/include/linux/videodev2.h
@@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ struct v4l2_querymenu {
#define V4L2_CTRL_FLAG_NEXT_CTRL 0x8000
/* User-class control IDs defined by V4L2 */
+#define V4L2_CID_MAX_CTRLS 1024
#define V4L2_CID_BASE (V4L2_CTRL_CLASS_USER | 0x900)
#define V4L2_CID_USER_BASE V4L2_CID_BASE
/* IDs reserved for driver specific controls */
Regards,
Mauro
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
Re: [PATCH] v4l2: handle multiplication overflow
Mauro Carvalho Chehab írta:
Em 22-12-2011 07:42, Németh Márton escreveu:
From: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
When a V4L2 ioctl is executed the memory provided by the caller in user space
is copied to the kernel space in video_usercopy() function. To find out
how many bytes has to be copied the check_array_args() helper function is
used.
This patch adds a check for multiplication overflow. Without this check the
multiplication may overflow resulting array_size to be zero. This means that
later on uninitialized value can trigger NULL pointer exception.
The overflow happens because ctrls-count is an __u32 multiplied by a
constant
coming from sizeof() operator. Multiplication result of two 32bit value may
be a 64bit value, thus overflow can happen. Similarly buf-length is an __u32
multiplied by a constant coming from sizeof() operator.
The chosen error value is -ENOMEM because we are just about to allocate
kernel memory to copy data from userspace. We cannot even store the required
number of bytes in the variable of size_t type.
To trigger the error from user space use the v4l-test 0.19 [1] or essentially
the following code fragment:
struct v4l2_ext_controls controls;
memset(controls, 0, sizeof(controls));
controls.ctrl_class = V4L2_CTRL_CLASS_USER;
controls.count = 0x4000;
controls.controls = NULL;
ret = ioctl(f, VIDIOC_G_EXT_CTRLS, controls);
References:
[1] v4l-test: Test environment for Video For Linux Two (V4L2) API
http://v4l-test.sourceforge.net/
Signed-off-by: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
---
I'm a little bit in doubt whether this is the correct way to check for the
multiplication overflow. In case of x86 architecture the MUL insruction [2]
can be used to multiply EAX with an other 32bit register, and the 64bit
result
is placed to EDX:EAX. In case of EDX != 0 the carry and overflow flags are
set.
This means that executing the MUL instruction on x86 already provides
information
whether the result fits to 32bit or not. I might use __u64 as a result of the
multiplication and check whether the upper 32bit is still zero but the
optimal
would be to check for the carry or the overflow flag.
Still, there could be a special case when the constant from sizeof()
operator is
a power of 2, in this case the compiler might optimize the multiplication
using
a shift left. In this case something else is needed.
I couldn't really find information about the number of bits for size_t on
different architectures. If size_t happens to be at least 64bit on some
architecture
then this overflow will not happen at all and the array_size will contain the
correct value.
What do you think?
Hi Németh,
IMO, the check should, instead, use a max hard limit for the array size.
There's no sense on allowing very large arrays there.
I think that this patch become obsoleted by this one, already merged:
Yes, that merged patch is simple and based on real-world practical
limits and also solves the overflow problem.
commit 6c06108be53ca5e94d8b0e93883d534dd9079646
Author: Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com
Date: Thu Jan 5 02:27:57 2012 -0300
[media] V4L/DVB: v4l2-ioctl: integer overflow in video_usercopy()
If ctrls-count is too high the multiplication could overflow and
array_size would be lower than expected. Mauro and Hans Verkuil
suggested that we cap it at 1024. That comes from the maximum
number of controls with lots of room for expantion.
$ grep V4L2_CID include/linux/videodev2.h | wc -l
211
Cc: stable sta...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab mche...@redhat.com
diff --git a/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
b/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
index e1da8fc..639abee 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
@@ -2226,6 +2226,10 @@ static int check_array_args(unsigned int cmd, void
*parg, size_t *array_size,
struct v4l2_ext_controls *ctrls = parg;
if (ctrls-count != 0) {
+ if (ctrls-count V4L2_CID_MAX_CTRLS) {
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ break;
+ }
*user_ptr = (void __user *)ctrls-controls;
*kernel_ptr = (void *)ctrls-controls;
*array_size = sizeof(struct v4l2_ext_control)
diff --git a/include/linux/videodev2.h b/include/linux/videodev2.h
index 6bfaa76..b2e1331 100644
--- a/include/linux/videodev2.h
+++ b/include/linux/videodev2.h
@@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ struct v4l2_querymenu {
#define V4L2_CTRL_FLAG_NEXT_CTRL 0x8000
/* User-class control IDs defined by V4L2 */
+#define V4L2_CID_MAX_CTRLS 1024
#define V4L2_CID_BASE(V4L2_CTRL_CLASS_USER | 0x900)
#define
[PATCH] v4l2: handle multiplication overflow
From: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
When a V4L2 ioctl is executed the memory provided by the caller in user space
is copied to the kernel space in video_usercopy() function. To find out
how many bytes has to be copied the check_array_args() helper function is used.
This patch adds a check for multiplication overflow. Without this check the
multiplication may overflow resulting array_size to be zero. This means that
later on uninitialized value can trigger NULL pointer exception.
The overflow happens because ctrls-count is an __u32 multiplied by a constant
coming from sizeof() operator. Multiplication result of two 32bit value may
be a 64bit value, thus overflow can happen. Similarly buf-length is an __u32
multiplied by a constant coming from sizeof() operator.
The chosen error value is -ENOMEM because we are just about to allocate
kernel memory to copy data from userspace. We cannot even store the required
number of bytes in the variable of size_t type.
To trigger the error from user space use the v4l-test 0.19 [1] or essentially
the following code fragment:
struct v4l2_ext_controls controls;
memset(controls, 0, sizeof(controls));
controls.ctrl_class = V4L2_CTRL_CLASS_USER;
controls.count = 0x4000;
controls.controls = NULL;
ret = ioctl(f, VIDIOC_G_EXT_CTRLS, controls);
References:
[1] v4l-test: Test environment for Video For Linux Two (V4L2) API
http://v4l-test.sourceforge.net/
Signed-off-by: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
---
I'm a little bit in doubt whether this is the correct way to check for the
multiplication overflow. In case of x86 architecture the MUL insruction [2]
can be used to multiply EAX with an other 32bit register, and the 64bit result
is placed to EDX:EAX. In case of EDX != 0 the carry and overflow flags are set.
This means that executing the MUL instruction on x86 already provides
information
whether the result fits to 32bit or not. I might use __u64 as a result of the
multiplication and check whether the upper 32bit is still zero but the optimal
would be to check for the carry or the overflow flag.
Still, there could be a special case when the constant from sizeof() operator is
a power of 2, in this case the compiler might optimize the multiplication using
a shift left. In this case something else is needed.
I couldn't really find information about the number of bits for size_t on
different architectures. If size_t happens to be at least 64bit on some
architecture
then this overflow will not happen at all and the array_size will contain the
correct value.
What do you think?
References:
[2] Intel 80386 Reference Programmer's Manual
MUL -- Unsigned Multiplication of AL or AX
http://www.scs.stanford.edu/nyu/04fa/lab/i386/MUL.htm
---
diff --git a/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c b/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
index e1da8fc..e239be8 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c
@@ -2200,6 +2200,7 @@ static int check_array_args(unsigned int cmd, void *parg,
size_t *array_size,
void * __user *user_ptr, void ***kernel_ptr)
{
int ret = 0;
+ size_t size;
switch (cmd) {
case VIDIOC_QUERYBUF:
@@ -2214,8 +2215,15 @@ static int check_array_args(unsigned int cmd, void
*parg, size_t *array_size,
}
*user_ptr = (void __user *)buf-m.planes;
*kernel_ptr = (void *)buf-m.planes;
- *array_size = sizeof(struct v4l2_plane) * buf-length;
- ret = 1;
+ size = sizeof(struct v4l2_plane) * buf-length;
+ if (unlikely(size buf-length)) {
+ /* *array_size overflowed at multiplication */
+ *array_size = 0;
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ } else {
+ *array_size = size;
+ ret = 1;
+ }
}
break;
}
@@ -2228,9 +2236,15 @@ static int check_array_args(unsigned int cmd, void
*parg, size_t *array_size,
if (ctrls-count != 0) {
*user_ptr = (void __user *)ctrls-controls;
*kernel_ptr = (void *)ctrls-controls;
- *array_size = sizeof(struct v4l2_ext_control)
- * ctrls-count;
- ret = 1;
+ size = sizeof(struct v4l2_ext_control) * ctrls-count;
+ if (unlikely(size ctrls-count)) {
+ /* *array_size overflowed at multiplication */
+ *array_size = 0;
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ } else {
+ *array_size = size;
+ ret = 1;
+
