linux-kernel - Re: XFS security fix never sent to -stable?

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

Date:	Fri, 06 Dec 2013 10:06:17 -0500
From:	Brian Foster <bfoster@...hat.com>
To:	Dwight Engen <dwight.engen@...cle.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
	Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>, Ben Myers <bpm@....com>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: XFS security fix never sent to -stable?

On 12/06/2013 09:43 AM, Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:35:50 -0800
> Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> It looks like 8c567a7fab6e086a0284eee2db82348521e7120c ("xfs: add
>> capability check to free eofblocks ioctl") is a security fix that was
>> never sent to -stable? From what I can see, it was introduced in 3.8
>> by 8ca149de80478441352a8622ea15fae7de703ced ("xfs: add
>> XFS_IOC_FREE_EOFBLOCKS ioctl").
>>
>> I don't see this in the 3.8.y tree. Should it be added there and
>> newer?
> 
> I believe that would be appropriate, but would defer to Brian as the
> original author of the eofblocks change.
> 

I have no objection to proposing this for stable. The fix is
straightforward and isolated enough.

Brian

>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Kees
>>
> 

--
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/