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]
Date:   Fri, 26 Apr 2019 14:08:18 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <>
To:     Wang YanQing <>,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf, x32: Fix bug for BPF_JMP | {BPF_JSGT, BPF_JSLE,

Hi Wang,

On 04/26/2019 12:56 PM, Wang YanQing wrote:
> The current method to compare 64-bit numbers for conditional jump is:
> 1) Compare the high 32-bit first.
> 2) If the high 32-bit isn't the same, then goto step 4.
> 3) Compare the low 32-bit.
> 4) Check the desired condition.
> This method is right for unsigned comparison, but it is buggy for signed
> comparison, because it does signed comparison for low 32-bit too.
> There is only one sign bit in 64-bit number, that is the MSB in the 64-bit
> number, it is wrong to treat low 32-bit as signed number and do the signed
> comparison for it.
> This patch fixes the bug.
> Signed-off-by: Wang YanQing <>

I presume this issue has coverage in our BPF kselftest suite, right? (If
not, please also add a test into the test_verifier tool.)


Powered by blists - more mailing lists