netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Three possible UDP fixes.

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: <20110621.163122.2184787350829030278.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Three possible UDP fixes.

From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:43:37 -0400

> These were originally found on a 2.6.34 baseline, but I looked
> at them and couldn't see any reason why they wouldn't be valid
> fixes on net-next.  But I'll feel better when someone like
> Dave and/or Eric sanity checks them too.
> 
> There was one thing that was a consideration.  In the 3rd patch,
> where we clear MSG_TRUNC bit -- is there anything in there that
> we really need to be concerned about preserving on the retry,
> or could we just unconditionally do "msg->msg_flags = 0" ?
> I wasn't sure, and so sticking with clearing the offending bit
> seemed like the most cautious approach.

All applied and queued up for -stable, 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