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  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]
Date:	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 20:59:57 +0000
From:	Rainer Weikusat <>
To:	Ben Hutchings <>
Cc:	Rainer Weikusat <>,
	Philipp Hahn <>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <>,
	Sasha Levin <>,
	"David S. Miller" <>,, Karolin Seeger <>,
	Jason Baron <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	Arvid Requate <>,
	Stefan Gohmann <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: Guard against other == sk in unix_dgram_sendmsg

Ben Hutchings <> writes:
> On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 20:17 +0000, Rainer Weikusat wrote:


>>>> I don't think this should apply when
>>>> receiving and sending sockets are identical. But that's just my
>>>> opinion. The other option would be to avoid the unix_state_double_lock
>>>> for sk == other.
>>> Given that unix_state_double_lock() already handles sk == other, I'm
>>> not sure why you think it needs to be avoided.
>> Because the whole complication of restarting the operation after locking
>> both sk and other because other had to be unlocked before calling
>> unix_state_double_lock is useless for this case:


> Well of course it's useless, but it's also harmless.  

As is adding a

for (i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i);

between any two statements. And this isn't even entirely true as the
pointless double-lock will then require "did we pointlessly
doube-lock" checks elsewhere. I think it should be possible to do this
in a simpler way by not pointlessly double-locking (this may be
wrong but it's worth a try).

> If we really wanted to optimise this we could also skip unlocking if
> other < sk.

I wouldn't want to hardcode assumptions about the unix_state_double_lock
algorithm in functions using it. 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists