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]
Message-ID: <20180504052731.jkwhs4h4fuia3pft@mwanda>
Date:   Fri, 4 May 2018 08:27:32 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Wenwen Wang <wang6495@....edu>
Cc:     "open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Aastha Gupta <aastha.gupta4104@...il.com>,
        Roman Storozhenko <romeusmeister@...il.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        "moderated list:STAGING - LUSTRE PARALLEL FILESYSTEM" 
        <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: lustre: llite: fix potential missing-check
 bug when copying lumv

There is no security problem here.  The user is allowed to choose either
v1 or v3.  Using a double read race condition to choose v1 is not
going to cause problems.  It's slightly more complicated than just
choosing it directly but that doesn't make it a security issue.

It's a bit like typing with your feet in that just because using your
toes instead of your fingergs is more complicated, it doesn't make it a
security issue.

regards,
dan carpenter

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ