linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] HID: Increase maximum report size allowed by hid_field

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: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1905092130010.17054@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:   Thu, 9 May 2019 21:30:28 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
cc:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ronald Tschalär <ronald@...ovation.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: Increase maximum report size allowed by
 hid_field_extract()

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:

> >Ronald (Cc-ed) raised quite a good point:
> >what's the benefit of removing the error message if this function (and
> >__extract) can only report an unsigned 32 bits value?
> 
> I didn’t spot this, sorry.
> 
> >
> >My take is we should revert 94a9992f7dbdfb28976b upstream and think at
> >a better solution.
> 
> I think using a new fix to replace it will be a better approach, as it at
> least partially solves the issue.

Guys, did this fall in between cracks? Is anyone planning to send a fixup?

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs