Re: A shift-out-of-bounds in minix_statfs in fs/minix/inode.c

From: Dan Carpenter
Date: Thu Jul 22 2021 - 04:10:27 EST


On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 06:37:23PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 01:14:06AM +0800, butt3rflyh4ck wrote:
> > ms = (struct minix_super_block *) bh->b_data; /// --------------> set
> > minix_super_block pointer
> > sbi->s_ms = ms;
> > sbi->s_sbh = bh;
> > sbi->s_mount_state = ms->s_state;
> > sbi->s_ninodes = ms->s_ninodes;
> > sbi->s_nzones = ms->s_nzones;
> > sbi->s_imap_blocks = ms->s_imap_blocks;
> > sbi->s_zmap_blocks = ms->s_zmap_blocks;
> > sbi->s_firstdatazone = ms->s_firstdatazone;
> > sbi->s_log_zone_size = ms->s_log_zone_size; // ------------------>
> > set sbi->s_log_zone_size
>
> So what you're saying is that if you construct a malicious minix image,
> you can produce undefined behaviour? That's not something we're
> traditionally interested in, unless the filesystem is one customarily
> used for data interchange (like FAT or iso9660).

Someone had the idea what we should make these things only compile for
usermode linux. It's kind of a hassle to copy things from UML but if
people really wanted to we could write a program to handle it.

regards,
dan carpenter