[PATCH 1/1] NET: llc, zero sockaddr_llc struct

[PATCH 1/1] NET: llc, zero sockaddr_llc struct

[Jiri Slaby]

sllc_arphrd member of sockaddr_llc might not be set. Zero sllc
before copying it to the above layers.

Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>
---
 net/llc/af_llc.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/llc/af_llc.c b/net/llc/af_llc.c
index 9208cf5..22629fc 100644
--- a/net/llc/af_llc.c
+++ b/net/llc/af_llc.c
@@ -909,7 +909,7 @@ release:
 static int llc_ui_getname(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr,
 			  int *uaddrlen, int peer)
 {
-	struct sockaddr_llc sllc;
+	struct sockaddr_llc sllc = {};
 	struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
 	struct llc_sock *llc = llc_sk(sk);
 	int rc = 0;
-- 
1.6.3.3

Re: [PATCH 1/1] NET: llc, zero sockaddr_llc struct

[David Miller]

From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:58:55 +0200

> sllc_arphrd member of sockaddr_llc might not be set. Zero sllc
> before copying it to the above layers.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>

I know it seems arbitrary, but could you please memset() on the
structure instead of using an empty initializer so that it's
consistent with how all other ->getname() implementations deal with
this issue?

It's easier to audit that way.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH 1/1] NET: llc, zero sockaddr_llc struct

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 06:56:17PM -0700, David Miller escreveu:
> From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:58:55 +0200
> 
> > sllc_arphrd member of sockaddr_llc might not be set. Zero sllc
> > before copying it to the above layers.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>
> 
> I know it seems arbitrary, but could you please memset() on the
> structure instead of using an empty initializer so that it's
> consistent with how all other ->getname() implementations deal with
> this issue?
> 
> It's easier to audit that way.

Or just set the uninitialized field to zero. But yeah, if what other
implementations are doing is to memset it to zero... maybe its more
clear from a quick glance :-)

- Arnaldo

[PATCH v2 1/1] NET: llc, zero sockaddr_llc struct

[Jiri Slaby]

sllc_arphrd member of sockaddr_llc might not be changed. Zero sllc
before copying to the above layer's structure.

Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>
---
 net/llc/af_llc.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/llc/af_llc.c b/net/llc/af_llc.c
index 9208cf5..c45eee1 100644
--- a/net/llc/af_llc.c
+++ b/net/llc/af_llc.c
@@ -914,6 +914,7 @@ static int llc_ui_getname(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr,
 	struct llc_sock *llc = llc_sk(sk);
 	int rc = 0;
 
+	memset(&sllc, 0, sizeof(sllc));
 	lock_sock(sk);
 	if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_ZAPPED))
 		goto out;
-- 
1.6.3.3

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] NET: llc, zero sockaddr_llc struct

[David Miller]

From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 07:43:39 +0200

> sllc_arphrd member of sockaddr_llc might not be changed. Zero sllc
> before copying to the above layer's structure.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>

Applied, thanks Jiri.