[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1471973727.13300.162.camel@decadent.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:35:27 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, luis.henriques@...onical.com
Cc: avijitnsec@...eaurora.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2014-9900 fix is not upstream
On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 09:40 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@...onical.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 14:41:07 +0100
>
> > Digging through some old CVEs I came across this one that doesn't
> seem be
> > in mainline. Was there a good reason for not being sent upstream?
> Maybe it was
> > rejected for some reason and I failed to find the discussion.
>
> Because the patch is completely bogus, and thus so is the CVE.
>
> The variable initializer clears out the entire structure.
>
> Until you can show compiler output from gcc that shows it not
> initializing the structure I will not apply this patch because I know
> that it faithfully does.
On some versions and architectures. Can you guarantee that you will
notice when an exception appears?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
The program is absolutely right; therefore, the computer must be wrong.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists