netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] net: unix: fix use-after-free

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: <561C0F06.90202@akamai.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:50:30 -0400
From:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	minipli@...glemail.com, normalperson@...t.net,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, davidel@...ilserver.org,
	dave@...olabs.net, olivier@...ras.ch, pageexec@...email.hu,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	joe@...ches.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] net: unix: fix use-after-free

On 10/11/2015 07:55 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
> Date: Fri,  9 Oct 2015 00:15:59 -0400
> 
>> These patches are against mainline, I can re-base to net-next, please
>> let me know.
>>
>> They have been tested against: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/13/195,
>> which causes the use-after-free quite quickly and here:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/2/693.
> 

Hi,

> I'd like to understand how patches that don't even compile can be
> "tested"?
> 
> net/unix/af_unix.c: In function ‘unix_dgram_writable’:
> net/unix/af_unix.c:2480:3: error: ‘other_full’ undeclared (first use in this function)
> net/unix/af_unix.c:2480:3: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> 
> Could you explain how that works, I'm having a hard time understanding
> this?
> 

Traveling this week, so responses a bit delayed.

Yes, I screwed up the posting. I had some outstanding code in my
local tree to make it compile, but I failed to refresh my patch series
with this outstanding code before mailing it out. So what I tested/built
was not quite what I mailed out.

As soon as I noticed this issue in patch 3/3 I re-posted it here:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=144440355808472&w=2

in an attempt to avoid this confusion. I'm happy to re-post the series
or whatever makes things easiest for you.

> Also please address Hannes's feedback, thanks.
> 

I've replied directly to Hannes.

Thanks,

-Jason
--
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