[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130729.141725.1188109086272236102.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:17:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: joe@...ches.com
Cc: dan.carpenter@...cle.com, jhs@...atatu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] net_sched: stack info leak in cbq_dump_wrr()
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:12:31 -0700
> On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 23:01 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:44:32PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 22:36 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> > > opt.__reserved isn't cleared so we leak a byte of stack information.
>> > []
>> > > diff --git a/net/sched/sch_cbq.c b/net/sched/sch_cbq.c
>> > []
>> > > @@ -1469,6 +1469,7 @@ static int cbq_dump_wrr(struct sk_buff *skb, struct cbq_class *cl)
>> > > opt.allot = cl->allot;
>> > > opt.priority = cl->priority + 1;
>> > > opt.cpriority = cl->cpriority + 1;
>> > > + opt.__reserved = 0;
>> > > opt.weight = cl->weight;
>> > > if (nla_put(skb, TCA_CBQ_WRROPT, sizeof(opt), &opt))
>> > > goto nla_put_failure;
>> >
>> > Alignment isn't guaranteed here so it'd
>> > probably be better with a memset.
>> >
>>
>> Hm... Which arches would align it differently?
>
> Hey Dan.
>
> None so far as I know, but what difference does it make
> when it's a general correctness issue?
Should see if the compiler optimizes the spurious stores away,
and if not we can use an initializer.
--
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