linux-kernel - Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: include: lustre_update.h: Fix for possible null pointer dereference

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9BE9E2B0-1326-4E5E-BCD1-9E9AD12FA784@intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2015 20:26:18 +0000
From:	"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
To:	Frank Zago <fzago@...y.com>
CC:	Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@...ctrumdigital.se>,
	"Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	"HPDD-discuss@...ts.01.org" <HPDD-discuss@...ts.01.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: include:
 lustre_update.h: Fix for possible null pointer dereference

Hello!

On Jan 29, 2015, at 2:49 PM, Frank Zago wrote:
>>>> @@ -165,12 +165,14 @@ static inline int update_get_reply_buf(struct
>>>> update_reply *reply, void **buf,
>>>>         int  result;
>>>> 
>>>>         ptr = update_get_buf_internal(reply, index, &size);
>>>> +
>>>> +       LASSERT((ptr != NULL && size >= sizeof(int)));
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Now size is tested before result. So it could assert if result < 0, while
>>> the function would have returned before.
>> 
>> But if prt is null krachar on the line:
>> result = *(int *)ptr;
>> 
>> Maybe there should be two LASSERT then.
> 
> 
> Yes, that would be safer.


   Actually I just noticed this function does not appear to be used in the client code at all.
   As such let's just remove update_get_reply_buf()?

   In fat I bet this entire lustre_update.h contains server side updating code, and is unused anywhere in the client code,
   so we might just be able to easily remove that.
   I see the only includer is ./lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c that I don't think actually uses anything there?

   Thanks.

Bye,
    Oleg--
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/