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: <01936d68-85d3-4d20-9beb-27ff9f62d826@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 02:49:26 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Kenny Ho <Kenny.Ho@....com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, y2kenny@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove hardcoded static string length

On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 06:39:44PM -0400, Kenny Ho wrote:
> UTS_RELEASE length can exceed the hardcoded length.  This is causing
> compile error when WERROR is turned on.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kenny Ho <Kenny.Ho@....com>
> ---
>  net/rxrpc/local_event.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/rxrpc/local_event.c b/net/rxrpc/local_event.c
> index 19e929c7c38b..61d53ee10784 100644
> --- a/net/rxrpc/local_event.c
> +++ b/net/rxrpc/local_event.c
> @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
>  #include <generated/utsrelease.h>
>  #include "ar-internal.h"
>  
> -static const char rxrpc_version_string[65] = "linux-" UTS_RELEASE " AF_RXRPC";
> +static const char rxrpc_version_string[] = "linux-" UTS_RELEASE " AF_RXRPC";

This is not an area of the network stack i know about, so please
excuse what might be a dumb question.

How is the protocol defined here? Is there an RFC or some other sort
of standard?

A message is being built and sent over a socket. The size of that
message was fixed, at 65 + sizeof(whdr). Now the message is variable
length. Does the protocol specification actually allow this?

	Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ