linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 20/20] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel

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: <CAHmME9rwVLu+H88Nq+kGaVfZsZjoVUM_SdosjSRRpreUd2uGuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Sep 2018 04:04:01 +0200
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 20/20] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel

Hi Andrew,

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 1:34 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> I see this BUG_ON() is still here. It really needs to be removed. It
> does not look like you need to crash the kernel here. Can you add in a
> test of len >= 128, do a WARN and then return. I think you then leak
> some memory, but i would much prefer that to a crashed machine.

Sure, I'll change it to that.

Regards,
Jason