netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2] packet: in recvmsg msg_name return at least sizeof sockaddr

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: <CAF=yD-Ksh0w=60v6DNFudKJvHWs0L0Da1GuSM=w0wOX-Gm+LYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:59:36 -0400
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] packet: in recvmsg msg_name return at least sizeof sockaddr_ll

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:49 AM David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
>
> From: Willem de Bruijn
> > Sent: 29 April 2019 16:47
> > Packet send checks that msg_name is at least sizeof sockaddr_ll.
> > Packet recv must return at least this length, so that its output
> > can be passed unmodified to packet send.
> >
> > This ceased to be true since adding support for lladdr longer than
> > sll_addr. Since, the return value uses true address length.
> >
> > Always return at least sizeof sockaddr_ll, even if address length
> > is shorter. Zero the padding bytes.
> >
> > Change v1->v2: do not overwrite zeroed padding again. use copy_len.
> >
> > Fixes: 0fb375fb9b93 ("[AF_PACKET]: Allow for > 8 byte hardware addresses.")
> > Suggested-by: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
> > ---
..
>
> Looks ok to me, not tried to compile it though.

Thanks again. I did that and also ran a small recv test that verifies
namelen (but clearly did not help me see the stupid bug I made in
v1..).