Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
From: Solar Designer
Date: Sun Aug 20 2006 - 15:59:25 EST
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 08:38:34PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sunday 20 August 2006 18:16, Solar Designer wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 10:34:43AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > In general I don't think it makes sense to submit stuff for 2.4
> > > that isn't in 2.6.
> > In general I agree, however right now I had the choice between
> > submitting these changes for 2.4 first and not submitting them at all
> > (at least for some months more). I chose the former.
> If there is really a length checking bug it shouldn't be that hard to fix it
> in both.
There were such length checking bugs being discovered and fixed in the
past. In particular, many got fixed between 2.2.18 and 2.2.19; that was
also when I added this hardening measure to -ow patches (starting with
2.2.19-ow1 released 5 years ago).
Of course, any known bugs should be fixed ASAP, but to me that is not a
sufficient reason to not keep a hardening measure like this. It's just
a matter of opinion.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/