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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:49:01 -0400
From:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:	Aurélien Charbon <aurelien.charbon@....bull.net>
Cc:	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Mailing list NFSv4 <nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org>,
	netdev ML <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] NFS: change the ip_map cache code to handle IPv6
	addresses

Thanks for working on this.

Could you run linux/scripts/checkpatch.pl on your patch and fix the
problems it complains about?

On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:05:42PM +0100, Aurélien Charbon wrote:
> static void update(struct cache_head *cnew, struct cache_head *citem)
> {
> @@ -149,22 +157,24 @@ static void ip_map_request(struct cache_
>                   struct cache_head *h,
>                   char **bpp, int *blen)
> {
> -    char text_addr[20];
> +    char text_addr[40];
>     struct ip_map *im = container_of(h, struct ip_map, h);
> -    __be32 addr = im->m_addr.s_addr;
> -
> -    snprintf(text_addr, 20, "%u.%u.%u.%u",
> -         ntohl(addr) >> 24 & 0xff,
> -         ntohl(addr) >> 16 & 0xff,
> -         ntohl(addr) >>  8 & 0xff,
> -         ntohl(addr) >>  0 & 0xff);
> +    if (ipv6_addr_v4mapped(&(im->m_addr))) {
> +        snprintf(text_addr, 20, NIPQUAD_FMT,
> +                ntohl(im->m_addr.s6_addr32[3]) >> 24 & 0xff,
> +                ntohl(im->m_addr.s6_addr32[3]) >> 16 & 0xff,
> +                ntohl(im->m_addr.s6_addr32[3]) >>  8 & 0xff,
> +                ntohl(im->m_addr.s6_addr32[3]) >>  0 & 0xff);
> +    } else {
> +        snprintf(text_addr, 40, NIP6_FMT, NIP6(im->m_addr));
> +    }
>     qword_add(bpp, blen, im->m_class);
>     qword_add(bpp, blen, text_addr);
>     (*bpp)[-1] = '\n';
> }

What happens when an unpatched mountd gets this request?  Does it
ignore it, or respond with a negative entry?

--b.
-
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