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
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sat, 22 Aug 2020 13:49:34 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <>
To:     Markus Mayer <>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <>,
        Colin Ian King <>,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <>,
        Linux ARM Kernel <>,
        Linux Kernel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memory: brcmstb_dpfe: fix array index out of bounds

On 8/22/2020 1:47 PM, Markus Mayer wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 13:21, Florian Fainelli <> wrote:
>> On 8/22/2020 1:14 PM, Markus Mayer wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 09:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski <> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 09:40:59AM -0700, Markus Mayer wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 04:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski <> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 09:52:21AM -0700, Markus Mayer wrote:
>>>>>>> We would overrun the error_text array if we hit a TIMEOUT condition,
>>>>>>> because we were using the error code "ETIMEDOUT" (which is 110) as an
>>>>>>> array index.
>>>>>>> We fix the problem by correcting the array index and by providing a
>>>>>>> function to retrieve error messages rather than accessing the array
>>>>>>> directly. The function includes a bounds check that prevents the array
>>>>>>> from being overrun.
>>>>>>> This patch was prepared in response to
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Mayer <>
>>>>>> Your Signed-off-by does not match From field. Please run
>>>>>> scripts/checkpatch on every patch you send.
>>>>>> I fixed it up, assuming is the valid email
>>>>>> address.
>>>>> No. I have always been using since it is shorter.
>>>>> That's also what's in the MAINTAINERS file. Please change it back. I
>>>>> accidentally used the long form for one of my e-mail replies which is
>>>>> where the confusion must have originated.
>>>> I'll drop the patch then. You need to resend with SoB matching email.
>>> Oh, I am starting to see what's happening here. This is new and
>>> apparently due to some changes with the mail server setup on our end.
>>> I have this in my patch file:
>>> $ head 0001-memory-brcmstb_dpfe-fix-array-index-out-of-bounds.patch
>>>   From 6b424772d4c84fa56474b2522d0d3ed6b2b2b360 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Markus Mayer <>
>>> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 08:56:52 -0700
>>> Sending patches like this used to work. Clearly our SMTP server has
>>> now taken it upon itself to rewrite the sender e-mail address. I
>>> wasn't expecting that. Let me look into it. Sorry for the hassle. It
>>> was not intentional.
>> Yes, if you used to use the SMTP relay server which did not require
>> authentication for internal hosts, and now you use with
>> your username, the SMTP server will rewrite the From: to
>> match the username used to authenticate with the server.
> Actually, it was the other way around. Connecting to
> does allow the "From:" header to be customized. The envelope sender,
> i.e. the "From " line at the very beginning of the e-mail, might still
> get rewritten, but that's okay since the "From:" header is left alone.
> The internal SMTP server, however, which does not require
> authentication, unexpectedly rewrites the "From:" header in the middle
> of the e-mail header.
> Got it set up now in a way that should work. At least it did in my
> test. I'll send out v3 of the patch momentarily, and then we'll know
> for sure.

Reason #42 why I hide behind my account! Glad you sorted it out.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists