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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 9 May 2020 17:57:56 -0700 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/20] tomoyo_write_control(): get rid of pointless access_ok() On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 5:51 PM Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> wrote: > > I think that this access_ok() check helps reducing partial writes (either > "whole amount was processed" or "not processed at all" unless -ENOMEM). No it doesn't. "access_ok()" only checks the range being a valid user address range. It doesn't actually help at all if the worry is "what if we take a page fault in the middle". Because it simply doesn't check those kinds of things. Now, if somebody passes actual invalid ranges (ie kernel addresses or other crazy stuff), they only have themselves to blame. The invalid range will be noticed when actually doing the user copy, and then you'll get EFAULT there. But there's no point in trying to figure that out early - it's only adding overhead, and it doesn't help any normal case. Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists