netdev - Re: wireless extensions vs. 64-bit architectures

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:	Thu, 08 Mar 2007 23:22:06 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	jt@....hp.com
Cc:	Jouni Malinen <jkm@...icescape.com>, Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>, Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: wireless extensions vs. 64-bit architectures

On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 14:11 -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:

> 	This is exactly what I was pointing out earlier. Well,
> actually, there may be ways of fixing it in the kernel, but that would
> be real ugly, and I don't want to go there.

Yeah, it would be extremely ugly and involve a lot of copying around
when the app actually receives the data.

> 	I've just released wireless_tools.29.pre15.tar.gz. This is
> supposed to include a "band-aid" for that problem. To the best of my
> knowledge, it should catch the problem and not introduce false
> positive. I would be glad if you guys would have a quick look into it,
> because obviously I can't test it.

I looked at the diff between pre14 and pre15 but have to admit that I
don't understand the code change. Unfortunately I can't test this until
the 20th earliest so it'd be good if someone else could test this.

Btw, could you look at the information leak patch I posted? We really
need to get that fix (or another appropriate one) out asap.

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (191 bytes)