lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [14/17] nfsd: wrong index used in inner loop
On 03/11/2011 08:40 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: roel<roel.kluin@gmail.com>
>
> commit 3ec07aa9522e3d5e9d5ede7bef946756e623a0a0 upstream.
>
> Index i was already used in the outer loop
>
> Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin<roel.kluin@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields<bfields@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman<gregkh@suse.de>
>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> @@ -1114,7 +1114,7 @@ nfsd4_decode_create_session(struct nfsd4
>
> u32 dummy;
> char *machine_name;
> - int i;
> + int i, j;
> int nr_secflavs;
>
> READ_BUF(16);
> @@ -1187,7 +1187,7 @@ nfsd4_decode_create_session(struct nfsd4
> READ_BUF(4);
> READ32(dummy);
> READ_BUF(dummy * 4);
> - for (i = 0; i< dummy; ++i)
> + for (j = 0; j< dummy; ++j)
> READ32(dummy);
> break;
> case RPC_AUTH_GSS:
>
>
> --

I agree that fixing the index in this loop is a good thing, but its
caused me to look at the result:

for (j = 0; j< dummy; ++j)
READ32(dummy);

It seems to me that this loop might never terminate if the original
buffer is maliciously constructed, e.g., 0, 1, 2, 3, ... Is the data in
this buffer really that well vetted?

rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-03-11 23:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans