linux-kernel - Re: [Patch 7/9] fs/exec.c: fix wrong return value of prepare

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:33 +0800
From:	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, WANG Cong <wangcong@...ux.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch 7/9] fs/exec.c: fix wrong return value of
	prepare_binprm()

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 05:37:58AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>It returns positives *exactly* on success.  In the case you've quoted
>we don't have any problems with read; we do have a problem with _short_
>read (i.e. miscalculated field size or truncated binary).  In the case
>you've patched we _expect_ a short read; it's normal for short scripts,
>to start with.  And we are ready to deal with it - the buffer is prefilled
>with zeroes and either we have enough to recognize signature (in which case
>we'll find the binfmt handler and let it deal with the entire thing, with
>full checks of its own) or we will not, in which case nobody will recognize
>the damn thing and that's it.

Thanks for your detailed explanation.

Since it's expected, it's needless to fix it. :-)

-- 
Hi, I'm a .signature virus, please copy/paste me to help me spread
all over the world.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/