linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: fix access_ok() and valid_user_address() using wrong USER_PTR

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: <CAGudoHESYkHNdZZ5j1KfZ3j23cEvPZUNWVuc7_TTKds=qNWt6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 09:56:56 +0100
From: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>, brauner@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, 
	jack@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	tglx@...utronix.de, pfalcato@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: fix access_ok() and valid_user_address() using
 wrong USER_PTR_MAX in modules

On Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 7:25 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Mateusz - I'd like to just credit you with this, since your comment
> about modules was why I started looking into this all in the first
> place (and you then wrote a similar patch). But I'm not going to do
> that without your ack.
>

I don't think crediting me here is warranted.

I would appreciate some feedback on the header split idea though. :)