netdev - Re: [PATCH] netlink: don't send NETLINK

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: <20160416063040.GA6380@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:	Sat, 16 Apr 2016 14:30:41 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, dmitrijs.ivanovs@...t.com,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netlink: don't send NETLINK_URELEASE for unbound sockets

Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
>
> diff --git a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
> index 215fc08c02ab..330ebd600f25 100644
> --- a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
> +++ b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
> @@ -688,7 +688,7 @@ static int netlink_release(struct socket *sock)
> 
>        skb_queue_purge(&sk->sk_write_queue);
> 
> -       if (nlk->portid) {
> +       if (nlk->portid && nlk->bound) {

Any reason why we're still testing portid at all? Isn't testing
bound enough?

Thanks,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt