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: Thu, 19 May 2022 14:09:01 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, duanxiongchun@...edance.com, smuchun@...il.com, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysctl: handle table->maxlen properly for proc_dobool On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 08:55:05PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote: > @@ -428,6 +428,8 @@ static int do_proc_dobool_conv(bool *negp, unsigned long *lvalp, > int write, void *data) > { > if (write) { > + if (*negp || (*lvalp != 0 && *lvalp != 1)) > + return -EINVAL; > *(bool *)valp = *lvalp; > } else { > int val = *(bool *)valp; Is this the right approach? Or should we do as C does and interpret writing non-zero as true? ie: *(bool *)valp = (bool)*lvalp; (is that cast needed? It wouldn't be if it were an int, but bool is a bit weird)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists