[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0807010352t264fda16g826912a857e88140@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:52:53 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: "Evgeniy Polyakov" <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kmemcheck detected possible information leak to userspace?
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> wrote:
>> $ addr2line -e vmlinux -i c05325c7 # packet_recvmsg
>> net/packet/af_packet.c:1093
>
> This gives:
> copied = skb->len;
> if (copied > len)
> {
> copied=len;
> msg->msg_flags|=MSG_TRUNC;
> }
>
> err = skb_copy_datagram_iovec(skb, 0, msg->msg_iov, copied);
>
> So everything looks ok, but driver could setup skb->len and/or
> skb->data_len to be slightly more than it placed data. Does
> above 'uuuu' bytes are at the end of the skb->data?
In fact I didn't give you the first such message. The first one looks like this:
kmemcheck: Caught 32-bit read from uninitialized memory (c72da052)
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
^
(with a similar stacktrace).
The u means uninitialized. So it seems not to be just the end. But I
am not sure where the end of the buffer is anyway.
But there is one thing I forgot: Is this memory initialized by DMA? If
so, the warning is bogus and I will go hide in shame.
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
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