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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 01:54:15 +0000 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [WTF?] random test in netlink_sendmsg() On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 08:07:58PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> > Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 21:32:43 +0000 > > > What do we want sendmsg(fd, &msg, 0) to do when fd is AF_NETLINK socket > > that had setsockopt(fd, SOL_NETLINK, NETLINK_TX_RING, ...) successfully done > > to it and msg.msg_iovlen is 0? > > We had a similar issue with msg_name/msg_namelen and we ended up saying > that if msg_namelen is zero then we force msg_name to NULL. Hmm... The thing is, there might be legitimate users with empty payload, making this call for the sake of SCM_CREDENTIALS. IOW, what should happen if we have msg_iovlen = 0 msg_iov = <anything> msg_control = &cmsg msg_controllen = cmsg_len Sure, both paths will pass creds, but what about the payload? And the number of datagram actually transmitted, for that matter? -- 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