| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <m2liy7evg9.fsf@igel.home> Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 19:15:50 +0200 From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org> To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> Cc: Alex Davis <alex14641@...oo.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Possible coding issue in udf?? Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> writes: > Alex Davis <alex14641@...oo.com> writes: > >> In fs/udf/inode.c, line 1455, linux 2.6.35, there is the following code: >> >> udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO)) | >> ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << 2) | >> ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << 4); >> >> Shouldn't we be shifting by 3 bits? i.e: >> udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXO)) | >> ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << 3) | >> ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << 6); >> >> The S_I.. constants are all defined in include/linux/stat.h as 3-bit values. >> >> I will send a patch if needed. > > I would suggest you test it first. Put in a UDF disk that triggers > this case (verify with a printk). Check in ls -l if the > permissions are correct or wrong. That's the write part of UDF, so a read-only test won't trigger. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@...ux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." -- 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