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: <1449174246.12092.8.camel@perches.com>
Date:	Thu, 03 Dec 2015 12:24:06 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Aaron Conole <aconole@...hat.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
	Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>,
	linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm

On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:10 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 03:03 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 14:32 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
> > > On 12/03/2015 01:52 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> > > > I think that as a minimum, the following patch should be evaluted,
> > > > but am unsure to whom I should submit it (after I test):
> > []
> > > Agreed - the intention here is certainly to have no side effects. It
> > > looks like 'no_printk()' is used in quite a few other places that would
> > > benefit from this change. So we probably want a generic
> > > 'really_no_printk()' macro.
> > 
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/17/231
> 
> I don't see this in the tree.

It never got applied.

> Also maybe we should just convert
> no_printk() to do what your 'eliminated_printk()'.

Some of them at least.

> So we can convert all users with this change?

I don't think so, I think there are some
function evaluation/side effects that are
required.  I believe some do hardware I/O.

It'd be good to at least isolate them.

I'm not sure how to find them via some
automated tool/mechanism though.

I asked Julia Lawall about it once in this
thread:  https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/3/696

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ