Re: [net-next v2] tcp: Explicitly mark reserved field in tcp_zerocopy_receive args.

On Sun, 7 Feb 2021 10:26:54 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote:

On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 03:28:28PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

quoted

On Sat,  6 Feb 2021 12:36:48 -0800 Arjun Roy wrote:  

quoted

From: Arjun Roy <redacted>

Explicitly define reserved field and require it to be 0-valued.  

quoted

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
index e1a17c6b473c..c8469c579ed8 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c

@@ -4159,6 +4159,8 @@ static int do_tcp_getsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level,
 		}
 		if (copy_from_user(&zc, optval, len))
 			return -EFAULT;
+		if (zc.reserved)
+			return -EINVAL;
 		lock_sock(sk);
 		err = tcp_zerocopy_receive(sk, &zc, &tss);
 		release_sock(sk);  

I was expecting we'd also throw in a check_zeroed_user().
Either we can check if the buffer is zeroed all the way,
or we can't and we shouldn't validate reserved either

	check_zeroed_user(optval + offsetof(reserved),
			  len - offsetof(reserved))
?  

There is a check that len is not larger than zs and users can't give
large buffer.

I would say that is pretty safe to write "if (zc.reserved)".

Which check? There's a check which truncates (writes back to user space
len = min(len, sizeof(zc)). Application can still pass garbage beyond
sizeof(zc) and syscall may start failing in the future if sizeof(zc)
changes.