netdev - [PATCH net-next 0/3] Three possible UDP fixes.

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

Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:43:37 -0400
From:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To:	davem@...emloft.net, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Three possible UDP fixes.

These were originally found on a 2.6.34 baseline, but I looked
at them and couldn't see any reason why they wouldn't be valid
fixes on net-next.  But I'll feel better when someone like
Dave and/or Eric sanity checks them too.

There was one thing that was a consideration.  In the 3rd patch,
where we clear MSG_TRUNC bit -- is there anything in there that
we really need to be concerned about preserving on the retry,
or could we just unconditionally do "msg->msg_flags = 0" ?
I wasn't sure, and so sticking with clearing the offending bit
seemed like the most cautious approach.

Thanks,
Paul.

---

Mark Asselstine (1):
  net: ipv4: fix potential memory leak by assigning uhash_entries

Xufeng Zhang (2):
  ipv6/udp: Use the correct variable to determine non-blocking condition
  udp/recvmsg: Clear MSG_TRUNC flag when starting over for a new packet

 net/ipv4/udp.c |    5 ++++-
 net/ipv6/udp.c |    5 ++++-
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.4.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html