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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 5 Feb 2019 15:18:58 +0100 (CET)
From:   Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
cc:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
        Evgenii Shatokhin <eshatokhin@...tuozzo.com>,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] livepatch: Proper error handling in the shadow
 variables selftest

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Petr Mladek wrote:

> Add proper error handling when allocating or getting shadow variables
> in the selftest. It prevents an invalid pointer access in some situations.
> It shows the good programming practice in the others.
> 
> The error codes are just the best guess and specific for this particular
> test. In general, klp_shadow_alloc() returns NULL also when the given
> shadow variable has already been allocated. In addition, both
> klp_shadow_alloc() and klp_shadow_get_or_alloc() might fail from
> other reasons when the constructor fails.
> 
> Note, that the error code is not really important even in the real life.
> The use of shadow variables should be transparent for the original
> livepatched code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>

Acked-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>

Miroslav

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ