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  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]
Date:   Tue, 4 Apr 2017 21:42:21 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add additional consistency check

On Tue 04-04-17 14:13:06, Cristopher Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Apr 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 
> > Yes, but we do not have to blow the kernel, right? Why cannot we simply
> > leak that memory?
> 
> Because it is a serious bug to attempt to free a non slab object using
> slab operations. This is often the result of memory corruption, coding
> errs etc. The system needs to stop right there.

Why when an alternative is a memory leak?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists