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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 08:59:04 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> To: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com> Cc: Bodo Stroesser <bostroesser@...il.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, target-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com, jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ddiss@...e.de, bvanassche@....org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] sgl_alloc_order: remove 4 GiB limit, sgl_free() warning On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 08:27:09PM -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote: > To protect against the "unsigned long long" length being too big why > not pick a large power of two and if someone can justify a larger > value, they can send a patch. > > if (length > 64ULL * 1024 * 1024 * 1024) > return NULL; That is not how we protect against arithemetic overflows in the kernel Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists