From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Dickson Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.0: insecure option and port range checking. Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:09:48 -0400 Message-ID: <4AD4C26C.2030002@RedHat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Robert Gordon Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3656 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933970AbZJMSKa (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:10:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/13/2009 01:56 PM, Robert Gordon wrote: > > I noticed that the insecure option validates that the client port is a > subset of IPPORT_RESERVED as opposed to just validating it is a valid > reserved port. The following proposed patch would correct that issue. > Would anyone care to comment ? .. > > # diff utils/mountd/auth.c utils/mountd/auth.c.orig > 171a172 >> (ntohs(caller->sin_port) < IPPORT_RESERVED/2 || > What version of nfs-utils are you using and please generate a proper patch (via gendiff) with a proper 'Signed-off-by:' label... tia, steved.