Re: [PATCH v2] hv_netvsc: Add (more) validation for untrusted Hyper-V values

[Wei Liu]

On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 02:02:01PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 08:30:22PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:26:28 +0100 Andrea Parri (Microsoft) wrote:
> > > For additional robustness in the face of Hyper-V errors or malicious
> > > behavior, validate all values that originate from packets that Hyper-V
> > > has sent to the guest.  Ensure that invalid values cannot cause indexing
> > > off the end of an array, or subvert an existing validation via integer
> > > overflow.  Ensure that outgoing packets do not have any leftover guest
> > > memory that has not been zeroed out.
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: Juan Vazquez <juvazq@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri (Microsoft) <parri.andrea@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
> > > Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > ---
> > > Applies to 5.11-rc3 (and hyperv-next).
> > 
> > So this is for hyperv-next or should we take it via netdev trees?
> 
> No preference, either way is good for me.

To be clear: There is no dependency on any patch in hyperv-next, right?

That's my understanding, but I would like to confirm it.

Wei.

> 
> Thanks,
>   Andrea