netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] filter: do not output bpf image address for security reason

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, 17 May 2013 18:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	bhutchings@...arflare.com
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dborkman@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] filter: do not output bpf image address for
 security reason

From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 02:11:18 +0100

> On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 16:31 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> @@ -58,10 +58,11 @@ extern void bpf_jit_free(struct sk_filter *fp);
>>  static inline void bpf_jit_dump(unsigned int flen, unsigned int proglen,
>>  				u32 pass, void *image)
>>  {
>> -	pr_err("flen=%u proglen=%u pass=%u image=%p\n",
>> -	       flen, proglen, pass, image);
>> +	/* Do not output address (image) for security reason */
>> +	pr_err("flen=%u proglen=%u pass=%u image=10\n",
> 
> Not "%pK"?

Yes, that's the acceptable way to deal with this issue.
--
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