On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 10:11:04AM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > Hi Dan > > On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 09:55, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > It's pretty unlikely that anyone is going to be using EFI authentication > > on a 32bit system. However, if you did, the efi_prepare_aligned_image() > > function would write 8 bytes of data to the &efi_size variable and it > > can only hold 4 bytes so that corrupts memory. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@linaro.org> > > --- > > lib/efi_loader/efi_image_loader.c | 5 +++-- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_image_loader.c > > b/lib/efi_loader/efi_image_loader.c > > index 26df0da16c93..3d5eef7dc3c2 100644 > > --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_image_loader.c > > +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_image_loader.c > > @@ -592,6 +592,7 @@ static bool efi_image_authenticate(void *efi, size_t > > efi_size) > > struct efi_signature_store *db = NULL, *dbx = NULL; > > void *new_efi = NULL; > > u8 *auth, *wincerts_end; > > + u64 size = efi_size; > > size_t auth_size; > > bool ret = false; > > > > @@ -600,11 +601,11 @@ static bool efi_image_authenticate(void *efi, size_t > > efi_size) > > if (!efi_secure_boot_enabled()) > > return true; > > > > - new_efi = efi_prepare_aligned_image(efi, (u64 *)&efi_size); > > Can't we change the prototype to access a size_t instead?
Yep, you're right. That's a better fix. Will do. regards, dan carpenter