linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4][next] uapi: socket: Introduce struct sockaddr

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: <202410281629.487F7CFE@keescook>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 16:31:08 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4][next] uapi: socket: Introduce struct
 sockaddr_legacy

On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > As this new struct will live in UAPI, to avoid breaking user-space code
> > that expects `struct sockaddr`, the `__kernel_sockaddr_legacy` macro is
> > introduced. This macro allows us to use either `struct sockaddr` or
> > `struct sockaddr_legacy` depending on the context in which the code is
> > used: kernel-space or user-space.
> 
> Are there cases of userspace API structures where the flexiable array
> appears in the middle? I assume this new compiler flag is not only for
> use in the kernel? When it gets turned on in user space, will the
> kernel headers will again produce warnings? Should we be considering
> allowing user space to opt in to using sockaddr_legacy?

I expect that the userspace usage of -Wflex-array-member-not-at-end will
be driven by the libc projects, as it'll need to happen there before it
can be done anywhere else. We'll be able to coordinate with them at that
time, but I'm not aware of any plans by any libc to use this flag yet.

-- 
Kees Cook