netdev - Re: [2/2] zd1211rw: fix NULL-deref at probe

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: <87r31p31nv.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:02:12 +0200
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     QCA ath9k Development <ath9k-devel@....qualcomm.com>,
        Daniel Drake <dsd@...too.org>,
        Ulrich Kunitz <kune@...ne-taler.de>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2/2] zd1211rw: fix NULL-deref at probe

Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 09:04:15AM +0000, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > Make sure to check the number of endpoints to avoid dereferencing a
>> > NULL-pointer or accessing memory beyond the endpoint array should a
>> > malicious device lack the expected endpoints.
>> > 
>> > Fixes: a1030e92c150 ("[PATCH] zd1211rw: Convert installer CDROM
>> > device into WLAN device")
>> > Cc: Daniel Drake <dsd@...too.org>
>> > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
>> 
>> Patch applied to wireless-drivers-next.git, thanks.
>> 
>> ca260ece6a57 zd1211rw: fix NULL-deref at probe
>
> What about patch 1/2 which fixes the same bug (literally copied from the
> zd1211rw driver)?

I will apply that to my separate ath.git tree, just didn't get to your
patch yet.

> And as these fixes should be backported to stable (I left out the tag
> for networking drivers)

Actually for wireless drivers you should add the stable tag.

> why only apply to -next?

I didn't see that the fix was important enough for 4.11.

-- 
Kalle Valo