linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL

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]

Message-ID: <20060828201223.GE13464@lists.us.dell.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 15:12:23 -0500
From:	Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@...l.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@...il.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	johninsd@....rr.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)

On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 12:00:37PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Matt Domsch wrote:
> >
> >No reason.  I was just trying to be careful, not leaving data in the
> >upper bits of those registers going uninitialized.  If we know they're
> >not being used ever, then it's not a problem.  But I don't think
> >that's the source of the command line size concern, is it?
> >
> 
> No, it's treating the command line as a fixed buffer, as opposed to a 
> null-terminated string.  This was always a bug, by the way.

OK, I'll look at fixing that, and using %esi throughout.

Thanks,
Matt


-- 
Matt Domsch
Software Architect
Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/