netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Parkin <tparkin@katalix.com>
To: Gavrilov Ilia <Ilia.Gavrilov@infotecs.ru>
Cc: James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lvc-project@linuxtesting.org" <lvc-project@linuxtesting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] l2tp: fix incorrect parameter validation in the pppol2tp_getsockopt() function
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 14:32:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zeh+m84IESlWU1rE@katalix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c9dd0486-aacc-4263-bcce-630fad445e72@infotecs.ru>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 989 bytes --]

On  Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 13:46:07 +0000, Gavrilov Ilia wrote:
> On 3/6/24 16:14, Tom Parkin wrote:
> > As it stands right now in the l2tp_ppp.c code, I think the check on
> > len will end up doing nothing, as you point out.
> > 
> > So moving the len check to before the min_t() call may in theory
> > possibly catch out (insane?) userspace code passing in negative
> > numbers which may "work" with the current kernel code.
> > 
> > I wonder whether its safer therefore to remove the len check
> > altogether?
> 
> Thank you for answer.
> 
> In my opinion, it is better to leave the 'len' check. This way it will 
> be easier for the user to understand where the error is.

Fair enough.

My concern was that in doing so we add a new behaviour which userspace
may notice and care about, but realistically I'm probably being
paranoid to imagine that any such userspace exists.

Thanks for your work on l2tp_ppp.c :-)

Reviewed-by: Tom Parkin <tparkin@katalix.com>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2024-03-06 14:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-06  9:58 [PATCH net-next] l2tp: fix incorrect parameter validation in the pppol2tp_getsockopt() function Gavrilov Ilia
2024-03-06 13:14 ` Tom Parkin
2024-03-06 13:46   ` Gavrilov Ilia
2024-03-06 14:32     ` Tom Parkin [this message]

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=Zeh+m84IESlWU1rE@katalix.com \
    --to=tparkin@katalix.com \
    --cc=Ilia.Gavrilov@infotecs.ru \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=jchapman@katalix.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lvc-project@linuxtesting.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    /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).