netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC] tun: add ioctl to modify vnet header size

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]

Date:	Wed, 17 Mar 2010 23:35:04 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@...el.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>, sri@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tun: add ioctl to modify vnet header size

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 02:10:11PM -0700, David Stevens wrote:
> Shouldn't we enforce a maximum too? Esp. if overflow/underflow
> will break any of the checks when it's used.
> 
>                                 +-DLS

So the maximum is MAX_INT :)
I don't think it can break any checks that aren't
already broken - what do you have in mind?


-- 
MST
--
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