netdev - [PATCH 0/4] RFC: tipc int vs 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1288207773-25448-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Date:	Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:29:29 -0400
From:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To:	davem@...emloft.net
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, allan.stephens@...driver.com,
	drosenberg@...curity.com, jon.maloy@...csson.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, security@...nel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] RFC: tipc int vs size_t fixes

[apologies if you get this 2x ; a bogus Status: header caused them
 to fail vger's sanity check for netdev, so resending.]

This is a starting point for fixing up the mix of int vs. size_t
usage that Dan spotted in TIPC as being open to possible exploits.

Open questions I had remaining with these patches were whether we could
trim out some of the unrequired casts, and whether we wanted to use a
size_t for everything that at any time was based on or compared to
an iov_len, including all instances of num_sect, when things like
iov_length() in <linux/uio.h> use unsigned long for looping over segments.
Also, whether we should give up at INT_MAX or LONG_MAX...

Please suggest changes as required, and I'll integrate them into this
pass1 of draft of patches from Al and resend as required until we've
got a final acceptable solution.

Thanks,
Paul.
--
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