[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171009.095322.1925806832264365123.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 09:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: johannes@...solutions.net
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pull-request: mac80211 2017-10-09
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 09:40:12 +0200
> The QCA folks found another netlink problem - we were missing validation
> of some attributes. It's not super problematic since one can only read a
> few bytes beyond the message (and that memory must exist), but here's the
> fix for it.
>
> I thought perhaps we can make nla_parse_nested() require a policy, but
> given the two-stage validation/parsing in regular netlink that won't work.
>
> Please pull and let me know if there's any problem.
Yeah, nested parsing is messy validation-wise.
Pulled, thanks Johannes.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists