netdev - Re: SELinux/IP_PASSSEC regression in 4.13-rcX

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:   Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:59:38 +0200
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: SELinux/IP_PASSSEC regression in 4.13-rcX

On Mon, 2017-07-24 at 22:00 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > I'm happy to test this, but if you are curious, you can find the
> > selinux-testsuite at the link below; the "inet_socket" tests are the
> > ones relevant to this problem.
> > 
> > * https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux-testsuite

Thanks, I'll have a look.

> > However, I believe there is a problem with this patch, see below.

[...]

> > > -#if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
> > > +#define UDP_SKB_IS_STATELESS 0x80000000
> > > +
> > >  static void udp_set_dev_scratch(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > >  {
> > > -       struct udp_dev_scratch *scratch;
> > > +       struct udp_dev_scratch *scratch = udp_skb_scratch(skb);
> > > 
> > >         BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct udp_dev_scratch) > sizeof(long));
> > 
> > The BUILD_BUG_ON() assertion no longer appears to be correct with this patch.
> 
> Nevermind, I just took a closer look at this and realized I made a
> mistake when applying your patch (had to apply manually for some
> reason).  I'm building a test kernel now.

Yup, I compile-tested the code, plus some basic sanity checks, so the
build breakage felt unexpected.

Thanks for testing,

Paolo