@@ -397,15 +397,15 @@ static int rose_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
{
struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
struct rose_sock *rose = rose_sk(sk);
- int opt;
+ unsigned int opt;
if (level != SOL_ROSE)
return -ENOPROTOOPT;
- if (optlen < sizeof(int))
+ if (optlen < sizeof(unsigned int))
return -EINVAL;
- if (copy_from_sockptr(&opt, optval, sizeof(int)))
+ if (copy_from_sockptr(&opt, optval, sizeof(unsigned int)))
return -EFAULT;
switch (optname) {
@@ -414,31 +414,31 @@ static int rose_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
return 0;
case ROSE_T1:
- if (opt < 1)
+ if (opt < 1 || opt > UINT_MAX / HZ)
return -EINVAL;
rose->t1 = opt * HZ;
return 0;
case ROSE_T2:
- if (opt < 1)
+ if (opt < 1 || opt > UINT_MAX / HZ)
return -EINVAL;
rose->t2 = opt * HZ;
return 0;
case ROSE_T3:
- if (opt < 1)
+ if (opt < 1 || opt > UINT_MAX / HZ)
return -EINVAL;
rose->t3 = opt * HZ;
return 0;
case ROSE_HOLDBACK:
- if (opt < 1)
+ if (opt < 1 || opt > UINT_MAX / HZ)
return -EINVAL;
rose->hb = opt * HZ;
return 0;
case ROSE_IDLE:
- if (opt < 0)
+ if (opt > UINT_MAX / (60 * HZ))
return -EINVAL;
rose->idle = opt * 60 * HZ;
return 0;
In case of possible unpredictably large arguments passed to rose_setsockopt() and multiplied by extra values on top of that, integer overflows may occur. Do the safest minimum and fix these issues by checking the contents of 'opt' and returning -EINVAL if they are too large. Also, switch to unsigned int and remove useless check for negative 'opt' in ROSE_IDLE case. Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with static analysis tool SVACE. Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Nikita Zhandarovich <n.zhandarovich@fintech.ru> --- net/rose/af_rose.c | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)