netdev - Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Prevent overrun when parsing v6 header options

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: <727c4b18-0d7b-b3c6-e0bb-41b3fe5902d3@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 31 May 2019 07:50:06 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     Young Xiao <92siuyang@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Prevent overrun when parsing v6 header options



On 5/30/19 11:29 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:17:04AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>
>> xfrm6_transport_output() seems buggy as well,
>> unless the skbs are linearized before entering these functions ?
> 
> The headers that it's moving should be linearised.  Is there
> something else I'm missing?
> 

What do you mean by should ?

Are they currently already linearized before the function is called,
or is it missing and a bug needs to be fixed ?