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: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 08:42:16 +0000 From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> To: 'Kees Cook' <keescook@...omium.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> CC: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH] mac80211: Recast pointer for trailing memcpy() From: Kees Cook > Sent: 17 June 2021 05:27 > > In preparation for FORTIFY_SOURCE performing compile-time and run-time > field bounds checking for memcpy(), memmove(), and memset(), avoid > intentionally writing across neighboring array fields. > > Give memcpy() a specific source pointer type so it can correctly > calculate the bounds of the copy. Doesn't the necessity of this sort of patch just sidestep the run-time checking and really indicate that it is just a complete waste of cpu resources? I bet code changes to avoid/fix the reported errors will introduce more bugs than the test itself will really find. David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists