netdev - Re: [G[PATCH 1/2][ENETLINK] max cmd boundary chec

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]

Date:	Fri, 01 Dec 2006 09:52:38 -0500
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [G[PATCH 1/2][ENETLINK] max cmd boundary chec

On Fri, 2006-01-12 at 15:40 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:

> There is no way to fix this in the interface. If you do u8 op = 312
> and ignore the compiler warning which states that the value has been
> truncated it can't be helped, the interface will see op = 56 

Indeed I think this is what i saw. 
312 == 0x138
This will be chopped to 0x38 == decimal 56

> and register it normally. 
> It is logically impossible to have more than 256
> entries on the cmd list, 
> the boundry check you're adding is completely
> useless.

You cannot have more than 256 commands because 0x138 and 0x38 are
treated as the same command. So does 0x238, 0x1138...
It is useless/unneeded if the register ops will always see the chopped
value. Is this so?

cheers,
jamal

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html