netdev - Re: [PATCHv2] net: bpf: reject invalid shifts

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160113.000016.2304166666171388740.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:00:16 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net, rabin@....in,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...nel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] net: bpf: reject invalid shifts

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:07:44 -0800

> On Tue, 2016-01-12 at 21:43 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
>> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 18:11:38 -0800
>> 
>> > As I said, it is possible some guys never noticed their BPF program
>> > were 'broken' because this invalid shift was hidden in a dead code
>> > part.
>> 
>> We should not hide bugs and unintended uses of operations with
>> undefined behavior.
> 
>    JUMP 2:
>    SHR  45
> 2: RET  10
> 
> 
> was a valid program.
> 
> But a dumb loader decided to know better.

I guess you are uninterested in knowing your programs contains such
garbage.