linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2014-9900 fix is not upstream

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:35:27 +0100
From:   Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, luis.henriques@...onical.com
Cc:     avijitnsec@...eaurora.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2014-9900 fix is not upstream

On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 09:40 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@...onical.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 14:41:07 +0100
> 
> > Digging through some old CVEs I came across this one that doesn't
> seem be
> > in mainline.  Was there a good reason for not being sent upstream? 
> Maybe it was
> > rejected for some reason and I failed to find the discussion.
> 
> Because the patch is completely bogus, and thus so is the CVE.
> 
> The variable initializer clears out the entire structure.
> 
> Until you can show compiler output from gcc that shows it not
> initializing the structure I will not apply this patch because I know
> that it faithfully does.

On some versions and architectures.  Can you guarantee that you will
notice when an exception appears?

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
The program is absolutely right; therefore, the computer must be wrong.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)