2014-07-26 0:52 GMT+04:00 Sasha Levin <sasha.le...@oracle.com>:
> On 07/25/2014 11:23 AM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>> After this report there was no usual "Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer
>> dereference"
>> and this gave me a clue that address 0 is mapped and contains valid socket
>> address structure in it.
>
> Interesting. Does it mean that all network protocols that check it for being
> NULL instead of checking
> the length are incorrect?
>
I think they are correct. After verify_iovec() we should have either
both msg->msg_name == 0 and msg->msg_namelen == 0,
or both != 0 (and msg_name should be a kernel address).
That bug allows to leave verify_iovec() with msg_namelen > 0 and
msg_name == NULL, causing troubles for protocols checking only
msg_namelen.
> (such as:)
>
> if (msg->msg_name) {
> DECLARE_SOCKADDR(struct sockaddr_can *, addr, msg->msg_name);
>
> [...]
>
>
> Thanks,
> Sasha
>
--
Best regards,
Andrey Ryabinin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
