| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20070327.164154.48396509.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:41:54 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: johnpol@....mipt.ru Cc: kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [1/1] netlink: no need to crash if table does not exist. From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:58:47 +0300 > On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 11:54:45AM +0100, Patrick McHardy (kaber@...sh.net) wrote: > > Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > > We would already do that on init. > > > Some things become very confused, when nl_table is not used to store > > > netlink sockets. > > > > > > Its unnecessary, but I don't understand what the problem is. > > Why would it be NULL and what gets confused? > > There is no problem as-is, but I implement unified cache for different > sockets (currently tcp/udp/raw and netlink are supported), which does > not use that table, so I currently wrap all access code into special > ifdefs, this one can be wrapped too, but since it is not needed, it > saves couple of lines of code. It is needed. It is there to make sure that a kernel netlink socket is not created before the af_netlink init code runs. We've had sequencing bugs like that in the initcall call chain in the past, that's why the check is there. - 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists