netdev - Re: [PATCH][IPVS] Don't leak sysctl tables if the scheduler registration fails

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20071204.004350.09249852.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:43:50 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	horms@...ge.net.au
Cc:	xemul@...nvz.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org, wensong@...ux-vs.org,
	ja@....bg
Subject: Re: [PATCH][IPVS] Don't leak sysctl tables if the scheduler
 registration fails

From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:36:48 +0900

> On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 01:04:53PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> > In case we load lblc or lblcr module we can leak some sysctl
> > tables if the call to register_ip_vs_scheduler() fails.
> 
> This looks correct to me.
> 
> > I've looked at the register_ip_vs_scheduler() code and saw, that
> > the only reason to fail is the name collision, so I think that
> > with some 3rd party schedulers this becomes a relevant issue. No?
> 
> I guess so. Though presumably register_ip_vs_scheduler() could
> have other modes of failure in the future.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>

Applied, thanks.
--
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