linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: ftrace: fix syscall name matching

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]

Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2016 16:18:27 +0100
From:   Rabin Vincent <rabin.vincent@...s.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: ftrace: fix syscall name matching

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 10:40:08AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:40:17 +0000
> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:03:45PM +0100, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> > > +static inline bool arch_syscall_match_sym_name(const char *sym,
> > > +					       const char *name)
> > > +{
> > > +	/* Skip sys_ */
> > > +	sym += 4;
> > > +	name += 4;  
> > 
> > Is this really safe?  What guarantees that we can wind forward four
> > bytes here?  If it's always safe, it needs a better comment than just
> > two words.
> 
> I believe it is, but a comment would do well.

I ended up just getting rid of the skip and comparing the whole name
instead.  I've sent a v2.