linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] crash in 2.6.22-git2 sysctl_set

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: <20070716172236.GA5771@austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:36 -0500
From:	linas@...tin.ibm.com (Linas Vepstas)
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crash in 2.6.22-git2 sysctl_set_parent()

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 07:06:56PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >  			.data		= &ipv4_devconf.loop,
> >  			.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
> >  			.mode		= 0644,
> > +			.child	= 0x0,
> >  			.proc_handler	= &proc_dointvec,
> >  		},
> Where did this entry above in devinet_sysctl come from?

My bad.
I habitually apply the "send-to-self" patch, since some of the 
network testing that I do is easiest if I load up the all of the 
adapters in the same box. (If you're not familiar with this patch ... 
its great, and I wish it was integratedd into mainline. It allows
one to drive network traffic through the physical devices, even
if they are in the same box.  Without it, the network stack is
too clever, and won't allow you to do this.)

> > +		{
> > +			.ctl_name	= 0,
> > +			.procname	= 0,
> > +		},
> I probably would have just done:
> +		{},

Yes, in retrospect, this would have been the simplest solution.

> What added the additional entry to devinet_root_dir?  I don't see that
> in Linus' tree?
> 
> The result may be fine but if it isn't named in a per network device
> manner we are adding duplicate entries to the root /proc/sys directory
> which is wrong.
> 
> Actually come to think of it I am concerned that someone added a
> settable entry into /proc/sys/ it should at least be in /proc/sys/net/
> where it won't conflict with other uses of that directory.  Especially
> as things like network devices have user controlled names.

Sigh. Silly me. Haste makes waste.

--linas

-
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/