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: <20120530.030205.1337682162603770949.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2012 03:02:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	jasowang@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	mst@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sock: validate data_len before allocating skb in
 sock_alloc_send_pskb()

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:46:23 +0200

> Why doing this test in the while (1) block, it should be done before the
> loop...
> 
> Or even in the caller, note net/unix/af_unix.c does this right.
> 
>         if (len > SKB_MAX_ALLOC)
>                 data_len = min_t(size_t,
>                                  len - SKB_MAX_ALLOC,
>                                  MAX_SKB_FRAGS * PAGE_SIZE);
> 
>         skb = sock_alloc_send_pskb(sk, len - data_len, data_len,
>                                    msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT, &err);

My impression is that the callers should be fixed to.  It makes no sense
to penalize the call sites that get this right.

And yes, if we do check it in sock_alloc_send_pskb() it should be done
at function entry, not inside the loop.
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ