[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140423.125126.244770898759207308.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 12:51:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc: ast@...mgrid.com, dborkman@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: filter: initialize A and X registers
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 22:13:00 -0700
> On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 23:57 -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
>> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 20:18:57 -0700
>>
>> > exisiting BPF verifier allows uninitialized access to registers,
>> > 'ret A' is considered to be a valid filter.
>> > So initialize A and X to zero to prevent leaking kernel memory
>> > In the future BPF verifier will be rejecting such filters
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
>>
>> Has the code always been like this?
>>
>> Did the eBPF changes introduce this problem either directly or
>> indirectly?
>
> Original code was fine AFAIK
>
> Fixes: bd4cf0ed331a2 ("net: filter: rework/optimize internal BPF interpreter's instruction set")
>
> David, is it possible for you to push net-next tree ?
What exactly are you asking me to do? Put this patch in the net-next tree?
Or are you asking me to merge net into net-next after I apply it?
It's definitely a 'net' patch.
--
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