On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 11:16:32AM +0100, Nicolas Iooss wrote: >> On 12/06/2015 10:35 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> >> On 11/18/2015 06:58 PM, Nicolas Iooss wrote: >> >>> drm_dev_set_unique() formats its parameter using kvasprintf() but many >> >>> of its callers directly pass dev_name(dev) as printf format string, >> >>> without any format parameter. This can cause some issues when the >> >>> device name contains '%' characters. >> >>> >> >>> To avoid any potential issue, always use "%s" when using >> >>> drm_dev_set_unique() with dev_name(). >> > >> > Not sure this is worth it really, normally people don't place % characters >> > into their device names, ever. And if they do it'll blow up. There's also >> > no security issue here since userspace can't set this name. >> > >> > If the maintainers of the affected drivers don't want this I won't merge >> > this patch. >> >> Actually I had the same opinion before I began to add __printf >> attributes and "%s" in several places in the kernel to make >> -Wformat-security useful. This led me to discover some funny issues >> like the one fixed by commit 3958b79266b1 ("configfs: fix kernel >> infoleak through user-controlled format string", >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=3958b79266b14729edd61daf9dfb84de45f4ec6d >> ). The patch I sent is in fact a very small step towards making >> -Wformat-security useful again to detect "real" issues. >> >> Of course, if you do not feel it is worth it and believe that dev_name >> is fully controlled by trusted sources which will never introduce any % >> character, I understand your will of not merging my patch. > > Ah, that's the context I was missing, that really should be in the commit > message. If this is part of an overall effort to enable something useful > it makes more sense to get it in. > > On the patch itself it feels rather funny to do a "%s", str); combo, maybe > we should have a drm_dev_set_unique_static instead? Including kerneldoc > explaining why there's too.
No caller of drm_dev_set_unique() actually uses the formatting for anything... so you'd end up with drm_dev_set_unique_static() and an orphaned drm_dev_set_unique()... BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html