From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xensource.com,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andreslc@gridcentric.ca>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [patch 1/3] xen/privcmd: check for integer overflow in ioctl
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 11:20:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120910112053.GW19410@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <504DC25F.7000508@citrix.com>
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:35:11AM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 08/09/12 10:52, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > If m.num is too large then the "m.num * sizeof(*m.arr)" multiplication
> > could overflow and the access_ok() check wouldn't test the right size.
>
> m.num is range checked later on so it doesn't matter that the
> access_ok() checks might be wrong. A bit subtle, perhaps.
>
Yeah. It's too subtle for my static checker but not so subtle for
a human being. Laziness on my part.
Please drop this patch.
regards,
dan carpenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xensource.com,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andreslc@gridcentric.ca>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [patch 1/3] xen/privcmd: check for integer overflow in ioctl
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:20:54 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120910112053.GW19410@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <504DC25F.7000508@citrix.com>
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:35:11AM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 08/09/12 10:52, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > If m.num is too large then the "m.num * sizeof(*m.arr)" multiplication
> > could overflow and the access_ok() check wouldn't test the right size.
>
> m.num is range checked later on so it doesn't matter that the
> access_ok() checks might be wrong. A bit subtle, perhaps.
>
Yeah. It's too subtle for my static checker but not so subtle for
a human being. Laziness on my part.
Please drop this patch.
regards,
dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-10 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-08 9:52 [patch 1/3] xen/privcmd: check for integer overflow in ioctl Dan Carpenter
2012-09-08 9:52 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-09-09 19:49 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-09-09 19:49 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-09-09 19:49 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-09-10 10:35 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2012-09-10 10:35 ` David Vrabel
2012-09-10 10:35 ` David Vrabel
2012-09-10 11:20 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2012-09-10 11:20 ` [Xen-devel] " Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120910112053.GW19410@mwanda \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=andreslc@gridcentric.ca \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.