linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH next] fs/9p: fix uaf in in v9fs_stat2inode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240322081312.2a8a4908@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 08:13:12 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Eric Van Hensbergen" <eric.vanhensbergen@...ux.dev>
Cc: asmadeus@...ewreck.org, "Lizhi Xu" <lizhi.xu@...driver.com>,
 syzbot+7a3d75905ea1a830dbe5@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux_oss@...debyte.com, lucho@...kov.net, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
 v9fs@...ts.linux.dev, regressions@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] fs/9p: fix uaf in in v9fs_stat2inode_dotl

On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 14:26:07 +0000 Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
> Patch is in the unapplied portion of my for-next tree along with
> another one.  I was hoping to hear some feedback on the other one
> before i did a pull request and was torn on whether or not I wait on
> -rc1 to send since we are so close.

My guess would be that quite a few folks use 9p for in-VM kernel
testing. Real question is how many actually update their work tree
before -rc1 or even -rc2, given the anticipated merge window code
instability.. so maybe there's no extreme urgency?

From netdev's perspective, FWIW, it'd be great if the fix reached
Linux before Thursday, which is when we will forward our tree again.