[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140514122720.GC1562@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 14:27:20 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [ 083/143] net: clamp ->msg_namelen instead of returning an error
Hi Dan,
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 01:02:15PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:33:23AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > ------------------
> >
> > From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
> >
> > [ Upstream commit db31c55a6fb245fdbb752a2ca4aefec89afabb06 ]
> >
> > If kmsg->msg_namelen > sizeof(struct sockaddr_storage) then in the
> > original code that would lead to memory corruption in the kernel if you
> > had audit configured. If you didn't have audit configured it was
> > harmless.
> >
> > There are some programs such as beta versions of Ruby which use too
> > large of a buffer and returning an error code breaks them. We should
> > clamp the ->msg_namelen value instead.
> >
> > Fixes: 1661bf364ae9 ("net: heap overflow in __audit_sockaddr()")
>
> You should probably take dbb490b96584 ('net: socket: error on a negative
> msg_namelen') as well. LTP has a test that passes negative values to
> this code and expects an error return so my clamp patch breaks LTP.
It happens that we already have it (127/143), but thank you for
checking, I really appreciate it.
Willy
--
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