On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 00:23:55 +0000, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
>
> [ Upstream commit a814c3597a6b6040e2ef9459748081a6d5b7312d ]
>
> Before accessing DMI data to record it for later, we should ensure
> that the DMI structures are large enough to contain the data in
> question.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <[email protected]>
> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> (...)
> @@ -191,13 +191,14 @@ static void __init dmi_save_ident(const struct
> dmi_header *dm, int slot,
> static void __init dmi_save_uuid(const struct dmi_header *dm, int slot,
> int index)
> {
> - const u8 *d = (u8 *) dm + index;
> + const u8 *d;
> char *s;
> int is_ff = 1, is_00 = 1, i;
>
> - if (dmi_ident[slot])
> + if (dmi_ident[slot] || dm->length <= index + 16)
I'm afraid this check is off by one and nobody noticed :-( I'll send a
fix-up patch.
Probably harmless in practice as I have never seen a system with a DMI
type 1 structure of exactly 24 bytes (would be 8 bytes for very old
implementations and at least 25 for anything even remotely recent), but
still not good. Sorry about that.
> return;
>
> + d = (u8 *) dm + index;
> for (i = 0; i < 16 && (is_ff || is_00); i++) {
> if (d[i] != 0x00)
> is_00 = 0;
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
