[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMEtUuzbPExM5dT+xDqbHtV5LZ3+E2Q0eq4xdmKWzLOZbTmuUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:48:05 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Chema Gonzalez <chema@...gle.com>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: filter: fix upper BPF instruction limit
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
> not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has the potential to break
> existing seccomp filters that used exactly BPF_MAXINSNS many instructions.
>
> Fixes: bd4cf0ed331a ("net: filter: rework/optimize internal BPF interpreter's instruction set")
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v3.15+
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
I wonder how did you catch this? :)
Just code inspection or seccomp actually generating such programs?
Thanks!
--
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