lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/13] [RFC] Rust support
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 08:26:21AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> ...
> > Besides just FP, 128-bit, etc, I remain concerned about just basic
> > math operations. C has no way to describe the intent of integer
> > overflow, so the kernel was left with the only "predictable" result:
> > wrap around. Unfortunately, this is wrong in most cases, and we're left
> > with entire classes of vulnerability related to such overflows.
>
> I'm not sure any of the alternatives (except perhaps panic)
> are much better.
> Many years ago I used a COBOL system that skipped the assignment
> if ADD X to Y (y += x) would overflow.
> That gave a very hard to spot error when the sump of a long list
> way a little too large.
> If it had wrapped the error would be obvious.
>
> There are certainly places where saturate is good.
> Mostly when dealing with analogue samples.
>
> I guess the problematic code is stuff that checks:
> if (foo->size + constant > limit) goto error;
> instead of:
> if (foo->size > limit - constant) goto error;

Right. This and alloc(size * count) are the primary offenders. :)

--
Kees Cook

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-15 20:09    [W:0.312 / U:0.884 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site