lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [CHECKER] copy_*_user length bugs?
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 12:14:56PM +0100, Chris Evans wrote:
> To justify this, consider if len were set to minus 2 billion. This will
> pass the sanity check, and pass the value straight on to copy_to_user. The
> copy_to_user parameter is unsigned, so this value because approximately
> +2Gb.

For ARM, this isn't a problem (we do 33-bit arithmetic in access_ok
specifically to catch this type of thing). x86 does the same thing (or
did when I wrote the code for ARM.

> Now, providing the malicious user passes a low user space pointer (e.g.
> just above 0), the kernel's virtual address space wrap check will not
> trigger because ~0 + ~2Gb does not exceed 4G. And the result is the user
> being able to read kernel memory.

But ~0 + ~2GB = ~2GB. Last time I checked, ~2GB is less than 3GB, and 3GB
is the start of kernel memory on x86. Therefore, I don't see that the
user will be able to read kernel memory.

--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:17    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans