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:	Wed, 15 Dec 2010 21:52:48 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
Cc:	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	P??draig Brady <P@...igBrady.com>,
	Am??rico Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, wharms@....de,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs: select: fix information leak to userspace

Le mercredi 15 décembre 2010 à 21:33 +0100, Julia Lawall a écrit :
> On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> 
> > On 2010-12-15, at 02:49, Al Viro wrote:
> > > Incorrect.  See 6.2.6.1 in C99; basically, padding bytes have unspecified
> > > contents.  Implementation is allowed to leave them in any state
> > > (including not bothering to copy them when doing struct assignments,
> > > etc.).  See Appendix J (portability issues) as well.
> > > 
> > > The bottom line: if you rely on that, you are relying on non-portable
> > > details of compiler behaviour.  Moreover, the authors are not even
> > > required to document what they are doing or to keep that behaviour
> > > consistent.
> > 
> > I thought my proposed solution was reasonable - add explicit padding fields where there are holes in the structure, which would be unused by the kernel, but since they are defined fields the compiler is obligated to initialize them.
> 
> Is the presence of holes always apparent at the source code level?  Or is 
> it dependent on the compiler or target architecture?

It depends on target architecture.

This means doing a full review to add a named padding only for arches
that need it.



--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ