On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 22:00 -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > It seems that in at least one case[1], nla_put_string() is being used > on an NLA_STRING, which lacks a NULL terminator, which leads to > silliness when nla_put_string() uses strlen() to figure out the size:
Fun! I'm not a big fan of the whole NLA_STRING thing with or without NUL terminator anyway, it's a bit confusing at times :-) > This is a problem at least here: > > struct regulatory_request { > ... > char alpha2[2]; > ... > > static const struct nla_policy nl80211_policy[NUM_NL80211_ATTR] = { > ... > [NL80211_ATTR_REG_ALPHA2] = { .type = NLA_STRING, .len = 2 }, > ... Yeah, this is clearly stupid. We already fixed one of these, see commit a5fe8e7695dc ("regulatory: add NUL to alpha2"). I'll fix up the second one too. > So, this specific problem needs fixing (in at least two places calling > nla_put_string(msg, NL80211_ATTR_REG_ALPHA2, ...)). While I suspect > it's only ever written an extra byte from the following variable in > the structure which is an enum nl80211_dfs_regions, Only one, since the other has alpha2[3] already :-) And in that case, yes, on little endian and only if the dfs region is non-zero, though the dfs region was added later so dunno what else there was - but certainly this struct would have always contained some enum value that had zero-bytes. > I worry there > might be a lot more of these (though I'd hope unterminated strings are > uncommon for internal representation). Generally they are, I'd argue. > And more generally, it seems > like only the NLA _input_ functions actually check nla_policy details. > It seems that the output functions should do the same too, yes? It doesn't really work that way - there's no real guarantee that the policy is symmetric on input/output. johannes