[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1289938136.28741.198.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:08:56 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Kees Cook <kees.cook@...onical.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
Vasiliy Kulikov <segooon@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc: explicitly clear stack memory for shminfo
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 11:58 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> This fixes a kernel stack memory contents leak by explicitly clearing
> the shminfo structure on the kernel stack before it is populated and
> copied back to userspace.
> diff --git a/ipc/shm.c b/ipc/shm.c
> index 7d3bb22..1d3d41f 100644
> --- a/ipc/shm.c
> +++ b/ipc/shm.c
> @@ -531,6 +531,7 @@ static inline unsigned long copy_shminfo_to_user(void __user *buf, struct shminf
> {
> struct shminfo out;
>
> + memset(&out, 0, sizeof(out));
> if(in->shmmax > INT_MAX)
> out.shmmax = INT_MAX;
> else
Hi Kees.
Trivial size optimization:
Perhaps it's better to use
struct type var = {};
instead of
struct type var;
memset(&var, 0, sizeof(var));
At least for x86, gcc produces very slightly smaller code
when there are other automatic variables like:
Larger:
struct type var;
struct type var2;
memset(&var, 0, sizeof(var));
Smaller:
struct type var = {};
struct type var2;
On the other hand, memset is more obvious.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists