netdev - Re: [PATCH][XFRM] Optimize policy dumping

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:	Mon, 04 Dec 2006 16:57:13 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
CC:	hadi@...erus.ca, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][XFRM] Optimize policy dumping

Patrick McHardy wrote:
> jamal wrote:
> 
>>All the way down, you call func with a NULL entry. You could add a check
>>to make sure it only gets invoked when last is not null, but the result
>>is in such a case, you will never send a 0 count element. I am sure
>>there could be other tricky scenarios like this that could be
>>constructed.
>>
>>Thoughts.
> 
> 
> Double sending can't happen, but you're right about potentially
> sending a NULL ptr when after setting it to NULL we don't find
> any other matching elements.
> 
> This patch should fix it (and is even simpler), by moving the
> check for pol->type != type before sending, we make sure that
> last always contains a valid element unless count == 0.
> 
> Also fixed an incorrect gcc warning about last_dir potentially
> being used uninitialized.


And again for SAs ..


View attachment "x" of type "text/plain" (1194 bytes)