From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: drosenberg@vsecurity.com, jon.maloy@ericsson.com,
allan.stephens@windriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
security@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Security] TIPC security issues
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 12:27:57 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101027.122757.98903207.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikKZdq9u0+Nkd4wtEcAZMT3YCPaXMv6FZaafetc@mail.gmail.com>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:51:19 -0700
> So doing this in verify_iovec() (and verify_compat_iovec - which I
> didn't do in my RFC patch) really does fix everything, and means that
> the individual socket types never have to worry about the subtle cases
> of overflow in any type.
I completely agree about capping things in verify_iovec().
And it was completely erroneous of me to change verify_iovec() to
return 'long' instead of 'int', it should have stayed at 'int' with a
cap.
Because the protocols don't even have a way to return something larger
than an 'int' as a return value due to the signature of the recvmsg()
and sendmsg() socket ops.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-27 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-21 23:45 TIPC security issues Dan Rosenberg
2010-10-22 0:31 ` [Security] " Linus Torvalds
2010-10-25 2:14 ` David Miller
2010-10-25 3:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-25 5:28 ` David Miller
2010-10-27 17:29 ` David Miller
2010-10-27 17:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-27 17:50 ` David Miller
2010-10-27 18:26 ` Dan Rosenberg
2010-10-27 18:34 ` David Miller
2010-10-27 18:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-27 19:27 ` David Miller [this message]
2010-10-28 15:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-28 18:45 ` Andy Grover
2010-10-28 18:49 ` David Miller
2010-10-27 18:27 ` Paul Gortmaker
2010-10-27 18:35 ` David Miller
2010-10-27 19:00 ` Paul Gortmaker
2010-10-28 19:51 ` Paul Gortmaker
2010-10-22 13:49 ` Jon Maloy
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=20101027.122757.98903207.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=allan.stephens@windriver.com \
--cc=drosenberg@vsecurity.com \
--cc=jon.maloy@ericsson.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=security@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).