[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpXCD4pvBy4fd82d3OGungnXvC7VeR=QG+7rJYFJzAcsZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 11:16:06 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us, victor@...atatu.com,
km.kim1503@...il.com, security@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/3] net/sched: teql: Enforce hierarchy placement
On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 8:03 AM Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
>
> GangMin Kim <km.kim1503@...il.com> managed to create a UAF on qfq by inserting
> teql as a child qdisc and exploiting a qlen sync issue.
> teql is not intended to be used as a child qdisc. Lets enforce that rule in
> patch #1. Although patch #1 fixes the issue, we prevent another potential qlen
> exploit in qfq in patch #2 by enforcing the child's active status is not
> determined by inspecting the qlen. In patch #3 we add a tdc test case.
Is teql still used by anyone? If not, maybe it is time to remove it.
Regards,
Cong
Powered by blists - more mailing lists