Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Sep 2022 12:23:48 -0700 | From | Kees Cook <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] string: Introduce strtomem() and strtomem_pad() |
| |
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 09:14:26PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Kees, > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 8:35 PM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 10:39:19AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > --- a/include/linux/string.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/string.h > > > > @@ -260,6 +260,49 @@ static inline const char *kbasename(const char *path) > > > > void memcpy_and_pad(void *dest, size_t dest_len, const void *src, size_t count, > > > > int pad); > > > > > > > > +/** > > > > + * strtomem_pad - Copy NUL-terminated string to non-NUL-terminated buffer > > > > + * > > > > + * @dest: Pointer of destination character array (marked as __nonstring) > > > > + * @src: Pointer to NUL-terminated string > > > > + * @pad: Padding character to fill any remaining bytes of @dest after copy > > > > + * > > > > + * This is a replacement for strncpy() uses where the destination is not > > > > + * a NUL-terminated string, but with bounds checking on the source size, and > > > > + * an explicit padding character. If padding is not required, use strtomem(). > > > > + * > > > > + * Note that the size of @dest is not an argument, as the length of @dest > > > > + * must be discoverable by the compiler. > > > > + */ > > > > +#define strtomem_pad(dest, src, pad) do { \ > > > > + const size_t _dest_len = __builtin_object_size(dest, 1); \ > > > > + \ > > > > + BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_constant_p(_dest_len) || \ > > > > + _dest_len == (size_t)-1); \ > > > > > > I think you want to include __must_be_array(dest) here. > > > > I didn't do that for the cases where we may be writing to non-array > > destinations (e.g. see the cast from u64 in the strncpy use in > > tools/perf/arch/x86/util/intel-pt.c). Since what we need to know is the > > object size, it does not strictly need to be an array. > > IC. That does mean we cannot catch silly mistakes where the > caller passes a pointer instead of the address of an array?
It's okay to pass a pointer as long as the compiler can reason about the size of the object being pointed at (which is what __bos() does here).
> > > > + for (int i = 2; i < sizeof(wrap.output); i++) > > > > > > unsigned int i (everywhere) > > > > I guess, but why? This could even be u8. > > sizeof() is unsigned, so using int may cause signed/unsigned comparison > warnings.
Do we have those warnings enabled anywhere? I thought solving that warning was Sisyphean. But I guess, yes, better to avoid adding yet more. :)
-- Kees Cook
| |