netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] MCTP sockaddr padding check/initialisation fixup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b8c77eb3b3379e52e91b9ecc9c35c2f707cc3ae5.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date:   Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:57:34 +0800
From:   Jeremy Kerr <jk@...econstruct.com.au>
To:     Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
        Matt Johnston <matt@...econstruct.com.au>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] MCTP sockaddr padding check/initialisation
 fixup

Hi Eugene,

> Padding/reserved fields necessitate appropriate checks in order to be
> usable in the future.

We don't have a foreseeable need for extra fields here; so this is a bit
hypothetical at the moment. However, I guess there may be something that
comes up in future - was there something you have in mind?

The requirements for the padding bytes to be zero on sendmsg() will
break the ABI for applications that are using the interface on 5.15;
there's a small, contained set of those at the moment though, so I'm OK
to handle the updates if this patch is accepted, but we'd need to make a
call on that soon.

Setting the pad bytes to zero on recvmsg() is a good plan though, I'm
happy for that change to go in regardless.

Cheers,

Jeremy