linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] fsverity fix for 5.15-rc4

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: <CAHk-=wibMN-Bixbu8zttUoV1ixoVRNk+jyAPEmsVdBe1GFoB5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:59:32 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Boris Burkov <boris@....io>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] fsverity fix for 5.15-rc4

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 11:22 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Fix an integer overflow when computing the Merkle tree layout of
> extremely large files, exposed by btrfs adding support for fs-verity.

I wonder if 'i_size' should be u64. I'm not convinced people think
about 'loff_t' being signed - but while that's required for negative
lseek() offsets, I'm not sure it makes tons of sense for an inode
size.

Same goes for f_pos, for that matter.

But who knows what games people have played with magic numbers (ie
"-1") internally, or where they _want_ signed compares. So it's
certainly not some obvious trivial fix.

Pulled.

            Linus