[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5357A7EE.6040404@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 13:45:50 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, ast@...mgrid.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: filter: initialize A and X registers
On 04/23/2014 07:13 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 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
Yep.
> Fixes: bd4cf0ed331a2 ("net: filter: rework/optimize internal BPF interpreter's instruction set")
>
> David, is it possible for you to push net-next tree ?
I think this would need to go into net tree first and then
for the upcoming changes, net would need to be merged into
net-next. This will create a minor merge conflict with the
BPF prandom extension; fix is to remove the defines near
__get_random_u32(), as they will be above __sk_run_filter()
already.
--
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