From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: CVE-2009-4537 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 10:36:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100327.103600.246539458.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100327142100.38d21565.michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> <20100327.103407.260084965.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, nhorman@tuxdriver.com To: michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:35519 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753701Ab0C0Rfg (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Mar 2010 13:35:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100327.103407.260084965.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: David Miller Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 10:34:07 -0700 (PDT) > From: Michael Gilbert > Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:21:00 -0400 > >> Hi, >> >> CVE-2009-4537 has been disclosed without any upstream activity for a >> while now. Discussion about the issue dried up in January [0], and a >> patch had been proposed [1], but no arguments were seen either for or >> against it. Note that redhat has already shipped that in their various >> kernel security updates. Would it make sense to merge those changes >> officially? > > A different version of the fix went into the tree. Ignore me, that was a fix for a different problem. I was waiting for Francois to come up with a cleaner fix but he stopped working on it, so yes I should put in the fix you mention or something similar. Neil, can you formally submit a version of the r8169 CVE for upstream? Thanks.