On 07/21/2017 03:36 PM, Edward Cree wrote:
There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields
was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test
which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus
allowed accesses; whereas the
On 07/21/2017 03:36 PM, Edward Cree wrote:
There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields
was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test
which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus
allowed accesses; whereas the
There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields
was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test
which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus
allowed accesses; whereas the correct handling will give a range of
[-255, 255]
There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields
was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test
which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus
allowed accesses; whereas the correct handling will give a range of
[-255, 255]
4 matches
Mail list logo