lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 073/190] Revert "media: rcar_drif: fix a memory disclosure"
    Hi Laurent,

    On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:22 PM Laurent Pinchart
    <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
    > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 08:58:22PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
    > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 3:06 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
    > > > This reverts commit d39083234c60519724c6ed59509a2129fd2aed41.
    > > >
    > > > Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in "bad
    > > > faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review "known
    > > > malicious" changes. The result of these submissions can be found in a
    > > > paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
    > > > entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing
    > > > Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu (University
    > > > of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota).
    > > >
    > > > Because of this, all submissions from this group must be reverted from
    > > > the kernel tree and will need to be re-reviewed again to determine if
    > > > they actually are a valid fix. Until that work is complete, remove this
    > > > change to ensure that no problems are being introduced into the
    > > > codebase.
    > > >
    > > > Cc: Kangjie Lu <kjlu@umn.edu>
    > > > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
    > > > Cc: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>
    > > > Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
    > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    > >
    > > Upon a second look, I still see nothing wrong with the original commit.
    > > However, as I'm no v4l expert, I'd like to defer to the experts for final
    > > judgement.
    >
    > It seems fine to me, but it also seems unneeded, as the V4L2 core clears
    > the whole f->fmt union before calling this operation. The revert will
    > this improve performance very slightly.

    Hmm, that means very recent commit f12b81e47f48940a ("media: core
    headers: fix kernel-doc warnings") is not fully correct, as it added
    kerneldoc stating this is the responsibility of the driver:

    + * @reserved: drivers and applications must zero this array

    Anyway, it doesn't look like this umn.edu patch introduced a bug.

    > > > --- a/drivers/media/platform/rcar_drif.c
    > > > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/rcar_drif.c
    > > > @@ -915,7 +915,6 @@ static int rcar_drif_g_fmt_sdr_cap(struct file *file, void *priv,
    > > > {
    > > > struct rcar_drif_sdr *sdr = video_drvdata(file);
    > > >
    > > > - memset(f->fmt.sdr.reserved, 0, sizeof(f->fmt.sdr.reserved));
    > > > f->fmt.sdr.pixelformat = sdr->fmt->pixelformat;
    > > > f->fmt.sdr.buffersize = sdr->fmt->buffersize;

    Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

    Geert

    --
    Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

    In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
    when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
    -- Linus Torvalds

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-04-22 08:59    [W:3.166 / U:0.112 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site