linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: Sanitize __get_vm

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200406125928.GA23653@pc636>
Date:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:59:28 +0200
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To:     William Kucharski <william.kucharski@...cle.com>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        jroedel@...e.de, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: Sanitize __get_vm_area() arguments

On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 02:49:13PM -0600, William Kucharski wrote:
> That's fine.
> 
> One could still argue size should be sanitized earlier when start and end
> are, but it's a nit either way (though size is used before it's checked,
> it's not in any way that could fail with bad results.)
> 
Agree. Therefore i do not have a strong opinion here, so it
basically depends on how to look at it :)

--
Vlad Rezki