linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH][next] hostap: Add __counted_by for struct prism2_download_data and use struct

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, 10 Oct 2023 09:17:34 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,  "Gustavo A. R. Silva"
 <gustavoars@...nel.org>,  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] hostap: Add __counted_by for struct
 prism2_download_data and use struct_size()

Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> writes:

>> > Should this be considered a v2 of:
>> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/94848cc3-6f5c-46d7-8cc7-98a4f10865b3@embeddedor.com/
>> > 
>> > ?
>> 
>> Oops... sorry, I forgot I had reviewed this patch of yours.
>> 
>> > 
>> > Yours is more complete since it includes the struct_size() change...
>> > 
>> 
>> Should I resend this explicitly marking it as a v2?
>
> I defer to Kalle -- your Subject is more accurate, so perhaps let's just
> let this stand?

No need to resend. I marked Kees' version as Superseded so that I don't
accidentally take the wrong version.

In the title "wifi:" is missing but I can add that during commit.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches