[PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Pavel Emelyanov]

Sorry for the noise, I had to check this right after facing this problem
with the copy_to_user()...

Both copy_to_ and _from_user return the number of bytes, that failed to
reach their destination, not the 0/-EXXX values.

Other net/ code handles this correctly.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>

---

diff --git a/net/can/raw.c b/net/can/raw.c
index ead50c7..2be8c6e 100644
--- a/net/can/raw.c
+++ b/net/can/raw.c
@@ -438,12 +438,12 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 			err = copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen);
 			if (err) {
 				kfree(filter);
-				return err;
+				return -EFAULT;
 			}
 		} else if (count == 1) {
 			err = copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen);
 			if (err)
-				return err;
+				return -EFAULT;
 		}
 
 		lock_sock(sk);
@@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 
 		err = copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen);
 		if (err)
-			return err;
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		err_mask &= CAN_ERR_MASK;
 
@@ -531,7 +531,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->loopback))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen);
+		err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen) ?
+			-EFAULT : 0;
 
 		break;
 
@@ -539,7 +540,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->recv_own_msgs))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen);
+		err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen) ?
+			-EFAULT : 0;
 
 		break;
 

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Oliver Hartkopp]

Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
> Sorry for the noise, I had to check this right after facing this problem
> with the copy_to_user()...
>
> Both copy_to_ and _from_user return the number of bytes, that failed to
> reach their destination, not the 0/-EXXX values.
>
> Other net/ code handles this correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
>

Thanks very much for catching this, Pavel!

Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de>

> ---
>
> diff --git a/net/can/raw.c b/net/can/raw.c
> index ead50c7..2be8c6e 100644
> --- a/net/can/raw.c
> +++ b/net/can/raw.c
> @@ -438,12 +438,12 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, 
> int level, int optname,
>                         err = copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen);
>                         if (err) {
>                                 kfree(filter);
> -                               return err;
> +                               return -EFAULT;
>                         }
>                 } else if (count == 1) {
>                         err = copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen);
>                         if (err)
> -                               return err;
> +                               return -EFAULT;
>                 }
>  
>                 lock_sock(sk);
> @@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int 
> level, int optname,
>  
>                 err = copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen);
>                 if (err)
> -                       return err;
> +                       return -EFAULT;
>  
>                 err_mask &= CAN_ERR_MASK;
>  
> @@ -531,7 +531,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int 
> level, int optname,
>                 if (optlen != sizeof(ro->loopback))
>                         return -EINVAL;
>  
> -               err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen);
> +               err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen) ?
> +                       -EFAULT : 0;
>  
>                 break;
>  
> @@ -539,7 +540,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int 
> level, int optname,
>                 if (optlen != sizeof(ro->recv_own_msgs))
>                         return -EINVAL;
>  
> -               err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen);
> +               err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, 
> optlen) ?
> +                       -EFAULT : 0;
>  
>                 break;
>  
>

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Wolfgang Grandegger]

Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> Sorry for the noise, I had to check this right after facing this problem
>> with the copy_to_user()...
>>
>> Both copy_to_ and _from_user return the number of bytes, that failed to
>> reach their destination, not the 0/-EXXX values.
>>
>> Other net/ code handles this correctly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
>>
> 
> Thanks very much for catching this, Pavel!
> 
> Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de>
> 
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/net/can/raw.c b/net/can/raw.c
>> index ead50c7..2be8c6e 100644
>> --- a/net/can/raw.c
>> +++ b/net/can/raw.c
>> @@ -438,12 +438,12 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, 
>> int level, int optname,
>>                         err = copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen);
>>                         if (err) {
>>                                 kfree(filter);
>> -                               return err;
>> +                               return -EFAULT;
>>                         }
>>                 } else if (count == 1) {
>>                         err = copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen);
>>                         if (err)
>> -                               return err;
>> +                               return -EFAULT;
>>                 }
>>  
>>                 lock_sock(sk);
>> @@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int 
>> level, int optname,
>>  
>>                 err = copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen);
>>                 if (err)
>> -                       return err;
>> +                       return -EFAULT;
>>  
>>                 err_mask &= CAN_ERR_MASK;
>>  
>> @@ -531,7 +531,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int 
>> level, int optname,
>>                 if (optlen != sizeof(ro->loopback))
>>                         return -EINVAL;
>>  
>> -               err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen);
>> +               err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen) ?
>> +                       -EFAULT : 0;
>>  
>>                 break;
>>  
>> @@ -539,7 +540,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int 
>> level, int optname,
>>                 if (optlen != sizeof(ro->recv_own_msgs))
>>                         return -EINVAL;
>>  
>> -               err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen);
>> +               err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, 
>> optlen) ?
>> +                       -EFAULT : 0;
>>  
>>                 break;
>>  
>>

What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case. It's confusing
otherwise and maybe the variable err is even obsolete.

Wolfgang.

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[David Miller]

From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:19:31 +0200

> What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case. It's confusing
> otherwise and maybe the variable err is even obsolete.

Sure, but when fixing a bug it's better to have a completely
localized change like this.

Not something which restructures the code unnecessarily at
the same time, that make it so much harder to review and
validate.

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Wolfgang Grandegger]

David Miller wrote:
> From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:19:31 +0200
> 
>> What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case. It's confusing
>> otherwise and maybe the variable err is even obsolete.
> 
> Sure, but when fixing a bug it's better to have a completely
> localized change like this.
> 
> Not something which restructures the code unnecessarily at
> the same time, that make it so much harder to review and
> validate.

Well, really,

   if (func(x))
        return -EFAULT;

instead of

   err = func(x);
   if (err)
	return -EFAULT;

is more straight forward and less confusing and I do not understand, why
it should be harder to review.

Wolfgang.

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:19:31AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case.
Preferred.

See sample patch below (made on top of -linus
so it does likely not apply but made it only to
see the difference anyway).


	Sam

diffstat:
 net/can/raw.c          |   21 ++++++++++-----------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/can/raw.c b/net/can/raw.c
index 201cbfc..69877b8 100644
--- a/net/can/raw.c
+++ b/net/can/raw.c
@@ -435,15 +435,13 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 			if (!filter)
 				return -ENOMEM;
 
-			err = copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen);
-			if (err) {
+			if (copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen)) {
 				kfree(filter);
-				return err;
+				return -EFAULT;
 			}
 		} else if (count == 1) {
-			err = copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen);
-			if (err)
-				return err;
+			if (copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen))
+				return -EFAULT;
 		}
 
 		lock_sock(sk);
@@ -493,9 +491,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(err_mask))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen);
-		if (err)
-			return err;
+		if (copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen))
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		err_mask &= CAN_ERR_MASK;
 
@@ -531,7 +528,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->loopback))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen);
+		if (copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen))
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		break;
 
@@ -539,7 +537,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->recv_own_msgs))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen);
+		if (copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen))
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		break;
 

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[David Miller]

From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:40:07 +0200

> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:19:31AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> > What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case.
> Preferred.
> 
> See sample patch below (made on top of -linus
> so it does likely not apply but made it only to
> see the difference anyway).

I want to make one comment, directed at Wolfgang.

You are absolutely wrong, Wolfgang, in saying that Pavel's
original patch isn't easier to review than just changing
this code to go:

	if (copy_*_user())
		return -EFAULT;

In fact, recoding things like this is an immense extra hardship on a
reviewer.  I'll explain why.

If I see a patch that changes:

	err = SOMETHING;
	break;

into:

	err = SOMETHING_ELSE;
	break;

I know, WITH JUST READING THE PATCH, exactly what the side effects of
this change are.

I DO NOT need to bring the code into my editor and validate side
effects to the surrounding code.

I know that the assignment to 'err' is being changed, and that's it.

Whereas if you change:

	err = SOMETHING;
	break;

into:

	if (SOMETHING)
		return -SOME_ERROR;
	break;

I now have to bring the code into an editor and make sure that the
control flow change doesn't break things.

For example, maybe the exit of the switch statement was important, to
make sure cleanup code runs at the end of the function to release
locks, free allocated memory, etc.

With Pavel's patch it is not necessary to make such validations so
it's INFINITELY easier to validate.

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Wolfgang Grandegger]

David Miller wrote:
> From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:40:07 +0200
> 
>> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:19:31AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>>> What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case.
>> Preferred.
>>
>> See sample patch below (made on top of -linus
>> so it does likely not apply but made it only to
>> see the difference anyway).
> 
> I want to make one comment, directed at Wolfgang.
> 
> You are absolutely wrong, Wolfgang, in saying that Pavel's
> original patch isn't easier to review than just changing
> this code to go:
> 
> 	if (copy_*_user())
> 		return -EFAULT;
> 
> In fact, recoding things like this is an immense extra hardship on a
> reviewer.  I'll explain why.
> 
> If I see a patch that changes:
> 
> 	err = SOMETHING;
> 	break;
> 
> into:
> 
> 	err = SOMETHING_ELSE;
> 	break;
> 
> I know, WITH JUST READING THE PATCH, exactly what the side effects of
> this change are.
> 
> I DO NOT need to bring the code into my editor and validate side
> effects to the surrounding code.
> 
> I know that the assignment to 'err' is being changed, and that's it.
> 
> Whereas if you change:
> 
> 	err = SOMETHING;
> 	break;
> 
> into:
> 
> 	if (SOMETHING)
> 		return -SOME_ERROR;
> 	break;
> 
> I now have to bring the code into an editor and make sure that the
> control flow change doesn't break things.
> 
> For example, maybe the exit of the switch statement was important, to
> make sure cleanup code runs at the end of the function to release
> locks, free allocated memory, etc.
> 
> With Pavel's patch it is not necessary to make such validations so
> it's INFINITELY easier to validate.

OK, I see, if you have to review a lot of patches, it does matter, indeed.

Wolfgang.

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[Oliver Hartkopp]

Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:19:31AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>   
>> What about removing the assignment "err =" in that case.
>>     
> Preferred.
>
> See sample patch below (made on top of -linus
> so it does likely not apply but made it only to
> see the difference anyway).
>   


I can definitely follow Daves remarks regarding the ability to review 
local bugfixes. In this case two commits should be used.

Btw. the cleanup an removal of the err variable usage in the pointed 
cases is a good suggestion. So even when the two latest changes in Sam's 
patch are not that obvious to be able to be reviewed locally i would 
like to ack this patch.

It should apply fine on Linus' tree and the current net-2.6.

Thanks to all of you & have a nice weekend.

Oliver

Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>

> diffstat:
>  net/can/raw.c          |   21 ++++++++++-----------
>  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/can/raw.c b/net/can/raw.c
> index 201cbfc..69877b8 100644
> --- a/net/can/raw.c
> +++ b/net/can/raw.c
> @@ -435,15 +435,13 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
>  			if (!filter)
>  				return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -			err = copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen);
> -			if (err) {
> +			if (copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen)) {
>  				kfree(filter);
> -				return err;
> +				return -EFAULT;
>  			}
>  		} else if (count == 1) {
> -			err = copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen);
> -			if (err)
> -				return err;
> +			if (copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen))
> +				return -EFAULT;
>  		}
>  
>  		lock_sock(sk);
> @@ -493,9 +491,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
>  		if (optlen != sizeof(err_mask))
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  
> -		err = copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen);
> -		if (err)
> -			return err;
> +		if (copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen))
> +			return -EFAULT;
>  
>  		err_mask &= CAN_ERR_MASK;
>  
> @@ -531,7 +528,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
>  		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->loopback))
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  
> -		err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen);
> +		if (copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen))
> +			return -EFAULT;
>  
>  		break;
>  
> @@ -539,7 +537,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
>  		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->recv_own_msgs))
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  
> -		err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen);
> +		if (copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen))
> +			return -EFAULT;
>  
>  		break;
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Socketcan-core mailing list
> Socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
>   

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[David Miller]

From: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:26:34 +0200

> Btw. the cleanup an removal of the err variable usage in the pointed 
> cases is a good suggestion. So even when the two latest changes in Sam's 
> patch are not that obvious to be able to be reviewed locally i would 
> like to ack this patch.

Right, I also have no problem with Sam's patch at all and plan to
apply it.

Thanks.

[PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation

[Sam Ravnborg]

Both copy_to_ and _from_user return the number of bytes, that failed to
reach their destination, not the 0/-EXXX values.

Based on patch from Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>

Signed-off-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de>
Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
---

Hi David.

> Right, I also have no problem with Sam's patch at all and plan to
> apply it.
OK - here is a proper patch.
Actual patch is the same - I just added a proper changelog.

	Sam

diff --git a/net/can/raw.c b/net/can/raw.c
index 201cbfc..69877b8 100644
--- a/net/can/raw.c
+++ b/net/can/raw.c
@@ -435,15 +435,13 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 			if (!filter)
 				return -ENOMEM;
 
-			err = copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen);
-			if (err) {
+			if (copy_from_user(filter, optval, optlen)) {
 				kfree(filter);
-				return err;
+				return -EFAULT;
 			}
 		} else if (count == 1) {
-			err = copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen);
-			if (err)
-				return err;
+			if (copy_from_user(&sfilter, optval, optlen))
+				return -EFAULT;
 		}
 
 		lock_sock(sk);
@@ -493,9 +491,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(err_mask))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen);
-		if (err)
-			return err;
+		if (copy_from_user(&err_mask, optval, optlen))
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		err_mask &= CAN_ERR_MASK;
 
@@ -531,7 +528,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->loopback))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen);
+		if (copy_from_user(&ro->loopback, optval, optlen))
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		break;
 
@@ -539,7 +537,8 @@ static int raw_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 		if (optlen != sizeof(ro->recv_own_msgs))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
-		err = copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen);
+		if (copy_from_user(&ro->recv_own_msgs, optval, optlen))
+			return -EFAULT;
 
 		break;
 
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build
index 277cfe0..4a7327b 100644
--- a/scripts/Makefile.build
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ endif
 
 # Do section mismatch analysis for each module/built-in.o
 ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH
-  cmd_secanalysis = ; scripts/mod/modpost $@
+  #cmd_secanalysis = ; scripts/mod/modpost $@
 endif
 
 # Compile C sources (.c)

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation

[David Miller]

From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:59:23 +0200

> diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build
> index 277cfe0..4a7327b 100644
> --- a/scripts/Makefile.build
> +++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ endif
>  
>  # Do section mismatch analysis for each module/built-in.o
>  ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH
> -  cmd_secanalysis = ; scripts/mod/modpost $@
> +  #cmd_secanalysis = ; scripts/mod/modpost $@
>  endif
>  
>  # Compile C sources (.c)

What's this? :-)

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 03:01:46AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:59:23 +0200
> 
> > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build
> > index 277cfe0..4a7327b 100644
> > --- a/scripts/Makefile.build
> > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
> > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ endif
> >  
> >  # Do section mismatch analysis for each module/built-in.o
> >  ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH
> > -  cmd_secanalysis = ; scripts/mod/modpost $@
> > +  #cmd_secanalysis = ; scripts/mod/modpost $@
> >  endif
> >  
> >  # Compile C sources (.c)
> 
> What's this? :-)

Sorry!
Workaround for a newly introduced kbuild bug and I did
not review my patch properly.
I hand edited it out in first mail but should have
done so in my queued patch to prevent this.

	Sam

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation

[David Miller]

From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:59:23 +0200

> Both copy_to_ and _from_user return the number of bytes, that failed to
> reach their destination, not the 0/-EXXX values.
> 
> Based on patch from Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
> Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de>

Applied, sans the local Makefile.build change in your tree,
thanks Sam. :-)

Re: [PATCH][CAN]: Fix copy_from_user() results interpretation.

[David Miller]

From: socketcan-core-owner@lists.berlios.de
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:29:05 +0200

> You are not allowed to post to this mailing list, and your message has
> been automatically rejected.  If you think that your messages are
> being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at
> socketcan-core-owner@lists.berlios.de.

Please folks, don't CC: mailing lists non-subscribers cannot post to.

Many people fine this _extremely_ irritating!