netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] net/smc: fix UAF on smcsk after smc_listen

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: <14ec76a2-e80e-44a8-a775-ebd4668959c4@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 11:24:50 +0200
From: Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
To: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
        martin.lau@...ux.dev, pabeni@...hat.com, song@...nel.org,
        sdf@...gle.com, haoluo@...gle.com, yhs@...com, edumazet@...gle.com,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org,
        Mahanta.Jambigi@....com, Sidraya.Jayagond@....com,
        wenjia@...ux.ibm.com, dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com,
        tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com, guwen@...ux.alibaba.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        jaka@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] net/smc: fix UAF on smcsk after
 smc_listen_out()



On 11.08.25 03:54, D. Wythe wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 02:57:31PM +0200, Alexandra Winter wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 31.07.25 10:42, D. Wythe wrote:
>>> BPF CI testing report a UAF issue:
>>>
>> [..]
>>
>> As this is a problem fix, you could send it directly to 'net'
>> instead of including it to this series.
>>
> 
> Hi Alexandra,
> 
> Yes, it should be sent to net. But the problem is that if I don't carry
> this patch, the BPF CI test will always crash. Maybe I should send a
> copy to both net and bpf-next? Do you have any suggestions?
> 
> Best wishes,
> D. Wythe

I do not have any experience with bpf-next. But typically patches
to 'net' are taken after one or two days, if there are no issues.
I'd assume they are then picked to net-next and bpf-next(?) almost instantly.
Then you would not need it in your bpf series anymore.

Sending a patch to two different mailing lists in parallel sounds like
a bad idea to me.