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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 17:48:45 -0700 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org> Cc: Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: protect skb->sk accesses from recursive dereference inside the stack On Thu, 2015-04-02 at 02:35 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015, at 02:27, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 17:06 -0700, Cong Wang wrote: > > > > > Shouldn't these skb's be orphaned for tunnel cases? Or we still have > > > to keep skb->sk for other valid use? > > > > skb should not be orphaned, until the very last stage. > > > > Many layers depend on this, really. > > > > Simply ask the question to yourself : > > > > What if I do not associate skb to a socket at first. What possibly > > breaks ? > > > > orphaning skb just because they traverse a tunnel would be quite > > horrible. > > Agreed, but we have some bits in the skb->sk pointer left for signaling > we are only keeping it around for destructor and upper layer > notifications. Destructors should be the only ones having to deal with > skb->sk and they can mask the bit. That would touch a lot of NULL > checks, though. Have you checked net/sched/sch_fq.c per chance ? skb->sk is not an opaque value. -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists