netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: fix /proc/net/snmp as memory corruptor

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]

Message-ID: <OF6C282093.F9856B9A-ON882574FB.006C580F-882574FB.006D3BF5@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:53:09 -0800
From:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org, Eric Sesterhenn <snakebyte@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix /proc/net/snmp as memory corruptor

Oh, that was me! Thank you, Alexey!

> This should be fixed as well, or multiple threads reading /proc/net/snmp
> could get mixed results without proper locking.

I don't believe locking is an issue here. If the values
change between the first and second tests, being counters,
they are still nonzero. If they are different in different
threads, it reflects an actual change in the counter. So
I'm not sure what you're talking about here.

I don't think they should be on the stack (obviously, or
I wouldn't have written it this way). So, FWIW, I like
Alexey's fix, which is what the code should've been.

For Alexey's patch:

Acked-by: David L Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>

                                                +-DLS

--
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