linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2016-10229 in 4.4.x series

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]

Date:   Mon, 15 May 2017 22:53:50 -0700
From:   Steven Pease <spease@...tabletech.com>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2016-10229 in 4.4.x series

Is there any particular reason that the CVE appears to be filed
against 4.4.60? Or is this just a mistake?

http://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2016-10229/

- Steven

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 06:09:53PM -0700, Steven Pease wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is my first post - not currently subscribed so please CC me. :) I
>> searched a bit for this question, but couldn't find an answer (Googled
>> '2016-10229 site:lkml.org').
>>
>> Does CVE-2016-10229 affect the newest version of the 4.4.x kernel
>> series (currently 4.4.68) and are there any plans to fix this in the
>> 4.4 kernel series?
>
> This one was fixed by upstream commit 197c949 ("udp: properly support
> MSG_PEEK with truncated buffers"), which was backported in 4.4 as
> commit dfe2042d96 in 4.4.21. So in short, 4.4.68 is safe.
>
> Willy



-- 
- Steven