On 2018-02-21 19:02, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> >> If there is a memory allocation error when trying to change an audit
> >> kernel feature value,
I think if we went back and looked at history we'd see that all of the
code originally had none of the if(!ab) checks after allocation and
they just sorta slowly crept in over time. I prefer this pattern, but
it used to be the opposite everywhere.
On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 19:02 -0500, Paul Moore
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
>> If there is a memory allocation error when trying to change an audit
>> kernel feature value, the ignored allocation error will trigger a NULL
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> If there is a memory allocation error when trying to change an audit
> kernel feature value, the ignored allocation error will trigger a NULL
> pointer dereference oops on subsequent use of that pointer. Return
>
If there is a memory allocation error when trying to change an audit
kernel feature value, the ignored allocation error will trigger a NULL
pointer dereference oops on subsequent use of that pointer. Return
instead.
Passes audit-testsuite.
See:
On 2018-02-21 01:47, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> If there is a memory allocation error when trying to change an audit
> kernel feature value, the ignored allocation error will trigger a NULL
> pointer dereference oops on subsequent use of that pointer. Return
> instead.
>
> See:
If there is a memory allocation error when trying to change an audit
kernel feature value, the ignored allocation error will trigger a NULL
pointer dereference oops on subsequent use of that pointer. Return
instead.
See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/76
Signed-off-by: