linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 059/190] Revert "RDMA/srpt: Remove unnecessary assertion in srpt_queue

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: <ab214d8e-bc80-ddfe-10e9-25389f84471b@acm.org>
Date:   Wed, 21 Apr 2021 09:05:44 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 059/190] Revert "RDMA/srpt: Remove unnecessary assertion
 in srpt_queue_response"

On 4/21/21 7:05 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:02:47AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:58:54PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> This reverts commit 9f48db0d4a08624bb9ba847ea40c8abad753b396.
>>>
>>> Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in "bad
>>> faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review "known
>>> malicious" changes.  The result of these submissions can be found in a
>>> paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
>>> entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing
>>> Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu (University
>>> of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota).
>>>
>>> Because of this, all submissions from this group must be reverted from
>>> the kernel tree and will need to be re-reviewed again to determine if
>>> they actually are a valid fix.  Until that work is complete, remove this
>>> change to ensure that no problems are being introduced into the
>>> codebase.
>>>
>>> Cc: https
>>> Cc: Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>
>>> Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
>>> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
>>> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>>>   drivers/infiniband/ulp/srpt/ib_srpt.c | 2 ++
>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> I think this one is fine
> 
> Sorry, I realize that is unclear. I mean I don't see a reason to
> revert this patch.

Greg, I share Jason's opinion and would like to see this revert dropped. 
The function srpt_queue_response() dereferences the 'ch' pointer before 
the BUG_ON(ch) statement is reached. I think this makes the BUG_ON() 
statement that would be reintroduced by this revert superfluous.

Thanks,

Bart.