linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] time: verify time values in adjtimex ADJ

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]

Message-ID: <CALAqxLU1c+hLHyKMgM4EFaNUN-Y2Kcj6O08DngcSpy1DZ_487Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 7 Dec 2015 11:54:13 -0800
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] time: verify time values in adjtimex ADJ_SETOFFSET to
 avoid overflow

On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Richard Cochran
<richardcochran@...il.com> wrote:
> The overflow is a latent problem, and the patch should:
>
> 1. return error in case (txc->time.tv_usec >= USEC_PER_SEC)
> 2. remove the redundant test in timekeeping_inject_offset.

So we probably want to keep the check in timekeeping_inject_offset()
since there can be other users as well of that function.

But its probably cleanest to add a check in ntp_validate_timex()
instead of where this patch does it.

thanks
-john

(And thanks Thomas for taking a second look here)
--
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/