Re: [PATCH net] vhost: fix OOB in get_rx_bufs()

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:54:44PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 15:05:05 +0800
> 
> > After batched used ring updating was introduced in commit e2b3b35eb989
> > ("vhost_net: batch used ring update in rx"). We tend to batch heads in
> > vq->heads for more than one packet. But the quota passed to
> > get_rx_bufs() was not correctly limited, which can result a OOB write
> > in vq->heads.
> > 
> >         headcount = get_rx_bufs(vq, vq->heads + nvq->done_idx,
> >                     vhost_len, &in, vq_log, &log,
> >                     likely(mergeable) ? UIO_MAXIOV : 1);
> > 
> > UIO_MAXIOV was still used which is wrong since we could have batched
> > used in vq->heads, this will cause OOB if the next buffer needs more
> > than 960 (1024 (UIO_MAXIOV) - 64 (VHOST_NET_BATCH)) heads after we've
> > batched 64 (VHOST_NET_BATCH) heads:
>  ...
> > Fixing this by allocating UIO_MAXIOV + VHOST_NET_BATCH iovs for
> > vhost-net. This is done through set the limitation through
> > vhost_dev_init(), then set_owner can allocate the number of iov in a
> > per device manner.
> > 
> > This fixes CVE-2018-16880.
> > 
> > Fixes: e2b3b35eb989 ("vhost_net: batch used ring update in rx")
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Applied and queued up for -stable, thanks!

Wow it seems we are down to hours round time post to queue.
It would be hard to keep up that rate generally.
However, I am guessing this was already in downstreams, and it's a CVE,
so I guess it's a no brainer and review wasn't really necessary - was
that the idea? Just checking.

-- 
MST