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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 12 May 2016 04:25:09 +0000
From:	"Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>
To:	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
CC:	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"rui.silva@...aro.org" <rui.silva@...aro.org>,
	"k.opasiak@...sung.com" <k.opasiak@...sung.com>,
	"lars@...afoo.de" <lars@...afoo.de>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] usb: gadget: f_fs: report error if excess data received

> On Wed, May 11 2016, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Also, returning -EOVERFLOW is not exactly correct here, because you'd
> > violate POSIX specification of read(), right ?
> 
> Maybe we could piggyback on:
> 
>        EINVAL fd was created via a call to timerfd_create(2) and the
>               wrong size buffer was given to read();
> 
> But I kinda agree.  I’m not sure how much we need to care about this
> instead of having user space round their buffers up to the nearest max
> packet size boundary.
> 
> --
> Best regards
> ミハウ “𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪86” ナザレヴイツ
> «If at first you don’t succeed, give up skydiving»

This is a good idea that "having user space round their buffers". But kernel
Still cannot hide error silently. :)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ