linux-kernel - Possible coding issue in udf??

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 May 2011 19:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Alex Davis <alex14641@...oo.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Possible coding issue in udf??

In fs/udf/inode.c, line 1455, linux 2.6.35, there is the following code:

	udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO)) |
		   ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << 2) |
		   ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << 4);

Shouldn't we be shifting by 3 bits? i.e:
	udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO)) |
		   ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << 3) |
		   ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << 6);

The S_I.. constants are all defined in include/linux/stat.h as 3-bit values.

I will send a patch if needed.

I code, therefore I am
--
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/