On 09/15/2016 09:54 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
Hi Pavel,
On 09/15/2016 03:08 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
+ if (copy_from_user(&udev->user_dev, buffer,
+ sizeof(struct uleds_user_dev))) {
+ ret = -EFAULT;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ if (!udev->user_dev.name[0]) {
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ ret = led_classdev_register(NULL, &udev->led_cdev);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto out;
No sanity checking on the name -> probably a security hole. Do not
push this upstream before this is fixed.
Thanks for catching this.
David, please check if the LED name sticks to the LED class
device naming convention.
I don't think it is a good idea to enforce the LED class naming
convention. Someone may have a userspace application they want to test
that has a hard-coded name that does not follow the convention.
And one thing that caught my eye only now - please use
devm_led_classdev_register().
How do I use devm_* when there is no parent device?
For now I'm dropping the patch.
