Am 9. Juni 2015 13:39:13 MESZ, schrieb Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com>:
>On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 12:32:57PM +0200, Peter Huewe wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> >> > +static inline void tpm_buf_store(struct tpm_buf *buf,
>> >> > + unsigned int pos,
>> >> > + const unsigned char *data,
>> >> > + unsigned int len)
>> >> > +{
>> >> > + BUG_ON((pos + len) > TPM_BUF_SIZE);
>> >> > +
>> >> > + memcpy(&buf->data[pos], data, len);
>> >> > +}
>> >>
>> >> Don't you have to update the ->length here?
>> >
>> >No. Store is for placing value in position, not appending to the
>end.
>> >
>> Then either add a length check (whether ->length is big enough)
>and/or
>> call the function "update"
>
>There is a length check in the beginning (first line of the function
>body).
>
Nope.
The check in the first line checks whether the write is <= the max buffer size,
but not <= head->length.
Since head->length is not updated (as per design) it is possible to write data
without effect using this function.
This is not what I expect from an API.
Example I create a buffer using tpm_buf_append with 12 bytes, so head->length
== 12
Then I use tpm_buf_store at pos 10 and len 4 --> in the buffer are 14 bytes,
but tpm_buf_length will only report 12 bytes.
Which is not what I would expect and your current check dies not prevent this.
Peter
--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
