linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] iter revert problems

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: <120e5aac-e056-1158-505b-fda41f1c99a5@kernel.dk>
Date:   Sat, 21 Aug 2021 17:13:42 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc:     io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Palash Oswal <oswalpalash@...il.com>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+9671693590ef5aad8953@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] iter revert problems

On 8/21/21 4:25 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 03:24:28PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 8/12/21 9:40 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> For the bug description see 2/2. As mentioned there the current problems
>>> is because of generic_write_checks(), but there was also a similar case
>>> fixed in 5.12, which should have been triggerable by normal
>>> write(2)/read(2) and others.
>>>
>>> It may be better to enforce reexpands as a long term solution, but for
>>> now this patchset is quickier and easier to backport.
>>
>> We need to do something with this, hopefully soon.
> 
> I still don't like that approach ;-/  If anything, I would rather do
> something like this, and to hell with one extra word on stack in
> several functions; at least that way the semantics is easy to describe.

Pavel suggested this very approach initially as well when we discussed
it, and if you're fine with the extra size_t, it is by far the best way
to get this done and not have a wonky/fragile API.

-- 
Jens Axboe