[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <24539.1498084275@famine>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 15:31:15 -0700
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc: michael.j.dilmore@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
joe@...ches.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert BUG_ON to WARN_ON in bond_options.c
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>From: Michael D <michael.j.dilmore@...il.com>
>Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 22:41:07 +0100
>
>> I don't think you can stop it being dereferenced... you just need to
>> prevent an attacker from exploiting the null pointer dereference
>> vulnerability right? And this is done by returning the function right
>> away?
>
>What's all of this about an "attacker"?
>
>If there is a bug, we dererence a NULL pointer, and we should
>fix that bug.
>
>The BUG_ON() helps us see where the problem is while at the
>same time stopping the kernel before the NULL deref happens.
Looking at the code more carefully than I did earlier, the only
way the BUG_ON will hit is if the rx_handler_data is NULL for a bonding
slave when this code executes.
This should be impossible, as there doesn't appear to be any way
to get into bond_option_active_slave_set for a slave prior to
bond_enslave registering the rx_handler for that slave, as these
operations are mutexed by RTNL.
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists